Re: Patch to remove redundant code
- From: Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>
- To: Sven Neumann <sven gimp org>
- Cc: "Padraig O'Briain" <Padraig Obriain Sun COM>, gtk-devel-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Patch to remove redundant code
- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 10:24:29 -0500 (EST)
Sven Neumann <sven gimp org> writes:
> Hi,
>
> "Padraig O'Briain" <Padraig Obriain Sun COM> writes:
>
> > I noticed a couple of redundant lines in gtk_widget_send_expose().
> >
> > Permission to commit?
> >
> > Padraig
> > Index: gtkwidget.c
> > ===================================================================
> > RCS file: /cvs/gnome/gtk+/gtk/gtkwidget.c,v
> > retrieving revision 1.293
> > diff -u -p -r1.293 gtkwidget.c
> > --- gtkwidget.c 2002/01/30 03:32:13 1.293
> > +++ gtkwidget.c 2002/01/31 08:55:42
> > @@ -2959,9 +2959,6 @@ gtk_widget_send_expose (GtkWidget *widge
> > g_return_val_if_fail (event != NULL, TRUE);
> > g_return_val_if_fail (event->type == GDK_EXPOSE, TRUE);
> >
> > - if (event->type != GDK_EXPOSE)
> > - return TRUE;
> > -
> > return gtk_widget_event_internal (widget, event);
> > }
> >
>
> not sure if this counts as redundant code. If GTK+ is compiled with
> G_DISABLE_CHECKS the g_return_if_fail() statements go away and you'll
> end up without a check for event->type. Calling gtk_widget_send_expose()
> with event->type != GDK_EXPOSE is a programming error however so you
> could argue that we don't need to do the check.
Exactly. It's a bit of extra paranoia. We frequently don't do it, but
I don't think it's worth removing it here.
Regards,
Owen
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]