From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:24:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:24:41 -0400 Received: from lightning.swansea.linux.org.uk ([194.168.151.1]:50698 "EHLO the-village.bc.nu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:24:33 -0400 Subject: Re: macro conflict To: mag@fbab.net ("Magnus Naeslund\(f\)") Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 21:27:35 +0100 (BST) Cc: raybry@timesn.com, twalberg@mindspring.com (Tim Walberg), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <03fc01c12c10$8155b060$020a0a0a@totalmef> from "Magnus Naeslund\(f\)" at Aug 23, 2001 10:16:34 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL6] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: From: Alan Cox Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > But then again, how do you know it's the type of x we want, maybe we want > type of y, that is and signed char (not an int like x). > Talk about hidden buffer overflow stuff :) This is one of the big problems with min and max, you get deeply suprising and unpleasant results if you don't consider sign propogation, sizes and overruns carefully. In C there are some great evils in that area, and its one reason a lot of people prefer to write such code explicitly. Alan