cond. op. on ='s LHS

[Jonathan Gingerich]

burow at cernvax.cern.ch (burkhard burow) writes:
>
>   I'm wondering if anyone has any comments on using:
>
>	  *(a==b?&c:&d) = 1;
>
>   instead of:
>
>	  if (a==b) c=1;
>	  else      d=1;

Yeah, you should use meaningful names even for shortlived variables.
It seems very unlikely that a, b, c, and d would convey anything in context.

Jon.

P.S. Why not (a==b?c=1:(d=1)) ?