mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Richard B. Johnson" <root@chaos.analogic.com>
To: Roland Dreier <roland@topspin.com>
Cc: "Hefty, Sean" <sean.hefty@intel.com>,
	Troy Benjegerdes <hozer@hozed.org>,
	infiniband-general@lists.sourceforge.net,
	Linux kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Infiniband-general] Getting an Infiniband access layer in theLinux kernel
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:00:38 -0500 (EST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.53.0402061258110.4045@chaos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52smhounpn.fsf@topspin.com>

On Fri, 6 Feb 2004, Roland Dreier wrote:

>     Richard> If some major changes are being considered, I think it's
>     Richard> time to get rid of the:
>
>     Richard> do { } while(0) stuff that permiates a lot of MACROS and
>     Richard> just use the { } as they were designed.
>
>     Richard> Before everybody screams, think. It's perfectly correct
>     Richard> to start a new "program unit" without a conditional
>     Richard> expression.  You just add a curley-brace, then close the
>     Richard> brace when you are though.
>
> This is totally, totally wrong.  If you get rid of do { } while (0),
> then you can't use the macro in an if statement.  Read any C FAQ for
> details, or try the following:
>

Yes you can. You just don't use an ';' if you are going
to use 'else'.


>     #define MAC(x) { x = x + 1; }
>
>     int main() {
>       int x = 0;
>
>       if (1)
>         MAC(x);
>       else
>         x = x - 1;
>     }
>
> I get the following (correct) error:
>
>     $ gcc a.c
>     a.c: In function `main':
>     a.c:8: syntax error before "else"
>     $ gcc --version
>     gcc (GCC) 3.2.3 20030502 (Red Hat Linux 3.2.3-20)
>
> because
>
>     if (1)
>         { x = x + 1 } ; /* <-- note semicolon
>     else
>         x = x - 1;
>
> is not correct C.
>

As I stated.


> By the way, it is possible to use parentheses and commas for some
> simple macros, so for example the following is OK:
>
>     #define MAC(x) ( x = x + 1, x = x * 2 )
>
>     int main() {
>       int x = 0;
>
>       if (1)
>         MAC(x);
>       else
>         x = x - 1;
>     }
>
> However I don't see anything wrong with the perfectly standard "do { }
> while (0)" idiom.  Certainly if some compiler generates worse code for
> that construct that just a plain { }, _that_ is a compiler bug that we
> shouldn't have to work around.
>
>  - Roland
>



Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.4.24 on an i986 machine (797.90 BogoMips).
            Note 96.31% of all statistics are fiction.



  reply	other threads:[~2004-02-06 17:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-02-06 16:42 Hefty, Sean
2004-02-06 17:05 ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-02-06 17:23   ` Roland Dreier
2004-02-06 18:00     ` Richard B. Johnson [this message]
2004-02-06 18:12       ` Måns Rullgård
2004-02-06 18:13       ` Chris Friesen
2004-02-06 18:22       ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2004-02-06 18:50         ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-02-06 19:02           ` Matti Aarnio
2004-02-06 19:11           ` Petr Vandrovec
2004-02-07  3:05             ` Jamie Lokier
2004-02-06 18:54         ` Måns Rullgård
2004-02-06 19:01     ` somenath
2004-02-06 17:27 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2004-02-06 18:51 ` Greg KH
2004-02-08  8:31   ` Fab Tillier
2004-02-08 16:29     ` Greg KH
2004-02-08 16:51       ` Fab Tillier
2004-02-09  2:55         ` Troy Benjegerdes
2004-02-09  2:57         ` Greg KH
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-02-24 17:55 Woodruff, Robert J
2004-02-24 18:03 ` Greg KH
     [not found] <mailman.1076018705.12618.linux-kernel2news@redhat.com>
2004-02-09  1:51 ` Pete Zaitcev
2004-02-08 23:43 Arnd Bergmann
2004-02-08 21:36 Woodruff, Robert J
2004-02-06  4:07 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-02-05 23:09 Woodruff, Robert J
2004-02-05 22:55 Woodruff, Robert J
2004-02-05 22:54 ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-02-05 22:26 Hefty, Sean
2004-02-05 22:40 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-02-05 22:39   ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-02-05 23:19 ` Greg KH
2004-02-06  1:10 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2004-02-05 22:17 Tillier, Fabian
2004-02-05 22:56 ` Brian Gerst
2004-02-05 22:58 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2004-02-05 22:02 Tillier, Fabian
2004-02-06  1:57 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2004-02-05 20:32 Tillier, Fabian
2004-02-05 21:27 ` Greg KH
2004-02-05 21:56   ` Chris Friesen
2004-02-06 20:22 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-02-05 19:26 Tillier, Fabian
2004-02-05 20:27 ` Greg KH

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.53.0402061258110.4045@chaos \
    --to=root@chaos.analogic.com \
    --cc=hozer@hozed.org \
    --cc=infiniband-general@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=roland@topspin.com \
    --cc=sean.hefty@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®