[svn-r6823] Purpose:

    Code Improvements/Bug Fixes

Description:
    Comparison of equality of a double/float variable to 0.0 is not
    guaranteed to work and is bad practice.

    In H5Fcontig.c, a warning was given by a statement like:

        x = (++x) % y;

    This could be confusing to a compiler I suppose.

    In H5RS.c, a typedef of a structure was being tagged by the compiler
    as "useless" because it had the form:

        typedef struct foo {
            int var1;
            /* ... */
        }; /* <--- note no name for this typedef */

    The statement "typedef struct foo foo" is already in the header file.

Solution:
    Test that the absolute value of the variable is < a very small
    positive number.

    Changed "x = (++x) % y" to "++x; x %= y;" instead.

    Removed the "typedef" from the structure in the H5RS.c file.

Platforms tested:
    Modi4   (Parallel & Fortran)
    Verbena (C++ & Fortran)
    Arabica (Fortran)

Misc. update:

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/src/H5Dcontig.c b/src/H5Dcontig.c
index a9fe574..2593d83 100644
--- a/src/H5Dcontig.c
+++ b/src/H5Dcontig.c
@@ -222,7 +222,8 @@ H5F_contig_fill(H5F_t *f, hid_t dxpl_id, struct H5O_layout_t *layout,
                             elmt_size, size, addr, buf)<0)
                         HGOTO_ERROR(H5E_DATASET, H5E_CANTINIT, FAIL, "unable to write fill value to dataset");
                 } /* end if */
-                mpi_round=(++mpi_round)%mpi_size;
+                ++mpi_round;
+                mpi_round %= mpi_size;
 
                 /* Indicate that blocks are being written */
                 blocks_written=1;