Re: strange case of "if ((a & b))"

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 02:40:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Agreed, but shouldn't we just drop the excess parens rather than
>> doubling down on useless notation?

> Using a notation like ((a & b) != 0) to enforce a boolean check after
> the bitwise operation is the usual notation I've preferred, FWIW.  Do
> you mean something different here?

Yeah --- the "!= 0" is pointless in the context of an if-test.

            regards, tom lane