On 10/30/14, 8:05 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> This switches from using a single if() with multiple conditions &&'d
>> together to a bunch of if() continue's. I don't know if those will perform
>> the same, and AFAIK this is pretty performance critical.
> Well, we could still use the old notation with a single if(). That's
> not much complicated to change.
I actually prefer the multiple if's; it reads a LOT cleaner. I don't know what the compiler will do with it though.
If we stick with this version I'd argue it makes more sense to just stick the sync_node = and priority = statements
intothe if block and ditch the continue. </nitpick>
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com