Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Ben Bacarisse, post: 4066519"]
Do you know De Morgan's laws?  They are very helpful in cases like this:

!(C1 && C2 && C3...) => !C1 || !C2 || !C3...

!(C1 || C2 || C3...) => !C1 && !C2 && !C3...

Just to check that we both came to the same conclusion, here is your
condition with the function call replaced by simple identifiers:

fgets && !(cDef && !(s_case1 || s_case2_1 || s_case2_2 || s_case3))

De Morgan's laws allow you to re-write the second part of the && as:

fgets && (!cDef || !!(s_case1 || s_case2_1 || s_case2_2 || s_case3))

and we can (in this situation) replace !!C1 with C1:

fgets && (!cDef || (s_case1 || s_case2_1 || s_case2_2  || s_case3))

and remove the now redundant brackets:

fgets && (!cDef || s_case1 || s_case2_1 || s_case2_2  || s_case3)

which is (fortunately!) the condition I suggested.

Probably, though my version is a little simpler.

The "exceptions" should really be in an array, of course.  Then you
could write:

while (fgets(buff, 500+1, fp) &&
         !strstr(buff, cDefinition) &&
         !match_any(buff, exceptions)) {...}

One day, this might even have to become:

while (fgets(buff, 500+1, fp) &&
          match_any(buff, definitons) &&
         !match_any(buff, exceptions)) {...}
[/QUOTE]

Verification