Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!uupsi!sunic!news.funet.fi!tukki.jyu.fi!jyu.fi!suhonen
From: suhonen@kunto.jyu.fi (Timo Suhonen)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: cond. op. on ='s LHS
Message-ID: <SUHONEN.91Feb14084827@kunto.jyu.fi>
Date: 14 Feb 91 07:48:27 GMT
References: <4155@cernvax.cern.ch>
Sender: news@tukki.jyu.fi (News articles)
Organization: University of Jyvaskyla, Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences
Lines: 19
In-Reply-To: burow@cernvax.cern.ch's message of 13 Feb 91 16:48:08 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host: kunto.jyu.fi

burow@cernvax.cern.ch (burkhard burow) writes:

   I'm wondering if anyone has any comments on using:

	  *(a==b?&c:&d) = 1;

   instead of:

	  if (a==b) c=1;
	  else      d=1;


OK. I have one: The if - else -statement is much more readable than the other
one. Have look with a compiler wich one if faster...

--
Timo Suhonen        I am logged in, therefore I am        suhonen@nic.funet.fi
                                                          suhonen@kunto.jyu.fi
   Opinions(?) are mine (if not stolen), NOT those of Univ. of Jyvaskyla.