| Message ID | 5116B802.8030401@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
Index: include/tr1/bessel_function.tcc =================================================================== --- include/tr1/bessel_function.tcc (revision 195919) +++ include/tr1/bessel_function.tcc (working copy) @@ -409,14 +409,8 @@ unsigned int __max_iter) { if (__x == _Tp(0)) - { - if (__nu == _Tp(0)) - return _Tp(1); - else if (__nu == _Tp(1)) - return _Tp(0); - else - return _Tp(0); - } + return __nu == _Tp(0) ? _Tp(1) : _Tp(0); + const _Tp __x2 = __x / _Tp(2); _Tp __fact = __nu * std::log(__x2); #if _GLIBCXX_USE_C99_MATH_TR1
Attached patch applied then. 2013-02-09 François Dumont <fdumont@gcc.gnu.org> * include/tr1/bessel_function.tcc (__cyl_bessel_ij_series): Code simplification. On 02/08/2013 08:46 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote: > On 02/08/2013 07:08 PM, François Dumont wrote: >> Just a small remark, in bessel_function.tcc, the following: >> >> + if (__x == _Tp(0)) >> + { >> + if (__nu == _Tp(0)) >> + return _Tp(1); >> + else if (__nu == _Tp(1)) >> + return _Tp(0); >> + else >> + return _Tp(0); >> + } >> >> could be simplified into >> >> + if (__x == _Tp(0)) >> + return (__nu == _Tp(0)) ? _Tp(1) : _Tp(0); > Thanks Francois. Besides the tiny-winy specific issue, we can all > learn why normally unrelated changes should not be bundled together in > the same patch, even more so when the more substantive one is by far > the smaller. > > Anyway, change pre-approved, whoever cares to commit it. > > Thanks, > Paolo. >