4 ms·

> I don't find those obfuscatory at all either, and instantly understood them upon first reading I understood the whole list of these obfuscation tricks upon

> I don't find those obfuscatory at all either, and instantly understood them upon first reading I understood the whole list of these obfuscation tricks upon first reading but its still obfuscation. Creating an array instead of an if-else-switch like the second line is fine but for just two elements and in combination with !!x (and !!x in general) its just nonsense and doesn't help at all. I'm all for code-density and avoiding repetition so I too use ?: whenever I can but not on the left side of an assignment. That's just an obfuscated if-else-statement. If normal code results in very long and "branchy" code you can rearrange your code in a better way.

gpderetta 6y ago
FWIW, !! is a fairly idiomatic way to cast a value to bool.
- jackewiehose 6y ago
  Ints are automatically converted to bool, there is no need to cast. What this does is it restricts the int to 1 or 0. The clean way to write this is x ? 1 : 0. This is understandable even if you don't know the Boolean inversion of 0 is 1 (Which isn't self-evident. For example in Basic its -1).
  - gpderetta 6y ago
    They are converted to bool in bool context. Outside of that you have to force it. int countNonZero = 0; for (int i = 0; i < values.size(); ++i) { countNonZero += !!values[i]; } Also c++ has explicit operator bool(); edit: not a great example as values[1] >0 would be better.
    - jackewiehose 6y ago
      You don't have to enforce a conversion from int to bool if you just want a bool. In this example you don't want to increment by 'bool', you want to increment by 1 or 0 (which are ints). So you use !!x to convert to bool and back to int. The reason I'm pointing this out is that often enough I had to work with code where this distinction was unknown to the author and you come across code like if (!!x) which is, again, just nonsense.
    - gallier2 6y ago
      You can also typecast to bool since C99. (bool)x if you include <stdbool.h> or (_Bool) if not.
    - userbinator 6y ago
      edit: not a great example as values[1] >0 would be better. Only if that's an array of unsigned ints, as otherwise the code would count only positive nonzeros.

gpderetta 6y ago

FWIW, !! is a fairly idiomatic way to cast a value to bool.

jackewiehose 6y ago
Ints are automatically converted to bool, there is no need to cast. What this does is it restricts the int to 1 or 0. The clean way to write this is x ? 1 : 0. This is understandable even if you don't know the Boolean inversion of 0 is 1 (Which isn't self-evident. For example in Basic its -1).
- gpderetta 6y ago
  They are converted to bool in bool context. Outside of that you have to force it. int countNonZero = 0; for (int i = 0; i < values.size(); ++i) { countNonZero += !!values[i]; } Also c++ has explicit operator bool(); edit: not a great example as values[1] >0 would be better.
  - jackewiehose 6y ago
    You don't have to enforce a conversion from int to bool if you just want a bool. In this example you don't want to increment by 'bool', you want to increment by 1 or 0 (which are ints). So you use !!x to convert to bool and back to int. The reason I'm pointing this out is that often enough I had to work with code where this distinction was unknown to the author and you come across code like if (!!x) which is, again, just nonsense.
  - gallier2 6y ago
    You can also typecast to bool since C99. (bool)x if you include <stdbool.h> or (_Bool) if not.
  - userbinator 6y ago
    edit: not a great example as values[1] >0 would be better. Only if that's an array of unsigned ints, as otherwise the code would count only positive nonzeros.