itsy bitsy bug

[Truth]

if (NULL == vertex->right() == vertex->left())
// wutdo


Seems legit, if both values equal NULL, we wutdo.

THAT IS UNTIL we take apart and realize how the compiler sees this statement differently from us. NULL is #define'd as 0. Boolean values are represented by 1 = true, 0 = false

So if the right vertex was NULL, it would evaluate that part of the equation to True before moving on. Now we would basically have the following:

if (1 == vertex->left())

Not what we want at all.

Likewise, if vertex->right() was not NULL, it would evaluate to false. So now we have:

if (0 == vertex->left()

This is also wrong, since right had a value.

Correct:

if (vertex->right() == NULL && vertext->left() == NULL)

http://www.pc-xp.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/bug_no_400.png

[Kimm Barely]

fuck uyou nerd

[kazroth]

is this EQ code? some sort of in-house language?

[Truth]

C-Increment

[kazroth]

ahh cool, those are some interesting looking if statements

[Truth]

http://www.bluffton.edu/~nesterd/java/SortingDemo.html