|
|
@@ -2776,7 +2776,7 @@ again @samp{4}.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Using @samp{++} or @samp{--} @emph{after} an lvalue does something
|
|
|
peculiar: it gets the value directly out of the lvalue and @emph{then}
|
|
|
-increments or decrement it. Thus, the value of @code{i++} is the same
|
|
|
+increments or decrements it. Thus, the value of @code{i++} is the same
|
|
|
as the value of @code{i}, but @code{i++} also increments @code{i} ``a
|
|
|
little later.'' This is called @dfn{postincrement} or
|
|
|
@dfn{postdecrement}.
|
|
|
@@ -2999,10 +2999,10 @@ if (r && x % r == 0)
|
|
|
@end example
|
|
|
|
|
|
@noindent
|
|
|
-A truth value is simply a number, so @code{r}
|
|
|
-as a truth value tests whether it is nonzero.
|
|
|
-But @code{r}'s meaning is not a truth value---it is a number to divide by.
|
|
|
-So it is better style to write the explicit @code{!= 0}.
|
|
|
+A truth value is simply a number, so using @code{r} as a truth value
|
|
|
+tests whether it is nonzero. But @code{r}'s meaning as en expression
|
|
|
+is not a truth value---it is a number to divide by. So it is better
|
|
|
+style to write the explicit @code{!= 0}.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here's another equivalent way to write it:
|
|
|
|
|
|
@@ -3021,7 +3021,7 @@ There are cases where assignments nested inside the condition can
|
|
|
actually make a program @emph{easier} to read. Here is an example
|
|
|
using a hypothetical type @code{list} which represents a list; it
|
|
|
tests whether the list has at least two links, using hypothetical
|
|
|
-functions, @code{nonempty} which is true of the argument is a nonempty
|
|
|
+functions, @code{nonempty} which is true if the argument is a nonempty
|
|
|
list, and @code{list_next} which advances from one list link to the
|
|
|
next. We assume that a list is never a null pointer, so that the
|
|
|
assignment expressions are always ``true.''
|
|
|
@@ -3035,8 +3035,8 @@ if (nonempty (list)
|
|
|
@end example
|
|
|
|
|
|
@noindent
|
|
|
-Here we get the benefit of the @samp{&&} operator, to avoid executing
|
|
|
-the rest of the code if a call to @code{nonempty} says ``false.'' The
|
|
|
+Here we take advantage of the @samp{&&} operator to avoid executing
|
|
|
+the rest of the code if a call to @code{nonempty} returns ``false.'' The
|
|
|
only natural place to put the assignments is among those calls.
|
|
|
|
|
|
It would be possible to rewrite this as several statements, but that
|
|
|
@@ -3071,7 +3071,7 @@ to compute and get the value from. It looks like this:
|
|
|
@end menu
|
|
|
|
|
|
@node Conditional Rules
|
|
|
-@subsection Rules for Conditional Operator
|
|
|
+@subsection Rules for the Conditional Operator
|
|
|
|
|
|
The first operand, @var{condition}, should be a value that can be
|
|
|
compared with zero---a number or a pointer. If it is true (nonzero),
|
|
|
@@ -3147,7 +3147,7 @@ next_element () ? : default_pointer
|
|
|
|
|
|
@noindent
|
|
|
is a way to advance the pointer and use its new value if it isn't
|
|
|
-null, but use @code{default_pointer} if that is null. We must not do
|
|
|
+null, but use @code{default_pointer} if that is null. We cannot do
|
|
|
it this way,
|
|
|
|
|
|
@example
|
|
|
@@ -3155,7 +3155,7 @@ next_element () ? next_element () : default_pointer
|
|
|
@end example
|
|
|
|
|
|
@noindent
|
|
|
-because it would advance the pointer a second time.
|
|
|
+because that would advance the pointer a second time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
@node Comma Operator
|
|
|
@section Comma Operator
|
|
|
@@ -3243,7 +3243,7 @@ which uses the comma operator and passes just one argument
|
|
|
(with value 6).
|
|
|
|
|
|
@strong{Warning:} don't use the comma operator around an argument
|
|
|
-of a function unless it helps understand the code. When you do so,
|
|
|
+of a function unless it makes the code more readable. When you do so,
|
|
|
don't put part of another argument on the same line. Instead, add a
|
|
|
line break to make the parentheses around the comma operator easier to
|
|
|
see, like this.
|
Richard Stallman