Summary: | ASTERISK-03174: [PATCH] refactor and clean up code | ||
Reporter: | Kevin P. Fleming (kpfleming) | Labels: | |
Date Opened: | 2005-01-03 18:05:31.000-0600 | Date Closed: | 2005-01-16 19:13:41.000-0600 |
Priority: | Minor | Regression? | No |
Status: | Closed/Complete | Components: | Core/Configuration |
Versions: | Frequency of Occurrence | ||
Related Issues: | |||
Environment: | Attachments: | ( 0) config_refactoring_rev2.diff.txt | |
Description: | Patch derived from bugs ASTERISK-2993020 and ASTERISK-3063099; this part is only the code reorganization, optimization and some minor reformatting. ****** ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ****** Disclaimer is on file. | ||
Comments: | By: Clod Patry (junky) 2005-01-04 23:25:44.000-0600 can i ask what's that exactly? return !!ast_category_get(config, category_name); !! ? is the same as: return ast_category_get(config, category_name); By: Kevin P. Fleming (kpfleming) 2005-01-05 07:50:42.000-0600 It's a little bit of C magic :-) ast_category_get returns either NULL, or a pointer. We don't want to return that, we want to return an int (boolean value). It goes like this: If ast_category_get returns NULL, the first ! turns it into "true" (1), the second turns it into "false" (0). If ast_category_get returns a pointer, the first ! turns it into "false" (0), the second turns it into "true" (1). So in other words, it's a simple way to collapse any value into the normal "boolean" values. By: Kevin P. Fleming (kpfleming) 2005-01-15 15:24:46.000-0600 I'm not sure what else this needs; it's a pretty straightforward cleanup patch that doesn't change any behavior. By: Mark Spencer (markster) 2005-01-15 18:17:27.000-0600 config.c:173: warning: no previous prototype for `ast_category_get' config.c:192: warning: `variable_get' defined but not used config.c:267: warning: `category_remove' defined but not used config.c:288: warning: `variable_remove' defined but not used config.c:309: warning: `variable_clone' defined but not used This one doesn't cleanly apply (anymore) and even when it did, it created several functions which are entirely unused. That's why it's not in yet :) By: Kevin P. Fleming (kpfleming) 2005-01-15 20:06:14.000-0600 Rediffed against current CVS, and unused functions removed. By: Mark Spencer (markster) 2005-01-15 23:58:19.000-0600 Fixed in CVS head. |