[PATCH libinput 1/5] util: allow list_remove() on a NULL node

[Peter Hutterer]

On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 12:37:26PM -0700, Bill Spitzak wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 8:49 PM, Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer at who-t.net>
> wrote:
> 
> >
> > +       if (elm->next == NULL && elm->prev == NULL)
> > +               return;
> > +
> >         elm->prev->next = elm->next;
> >         elm->next->prev = elm->prev;
> >         elm->next = NULL;
> >
> 
>  You probably don't need to check both pointers, as the code will crash if
> only one of them is NULL.

yeah, that's true but obviousness in code is worth a lot. only checking next
or prev will make the casual reviewer wonder why we don't check both, so
it'd require a comment or generally more brain-power to review than the
bleedingly obvious condition.

Cheers,
   Peter