Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Explain a second alternative for multi-line macros.

In this case, the second form
should be used when the macro needs to return a value (and you can't
use an inline function for whatever reason), whereas the first form
should be used at all other times.

that's a fair point, although it's certainly not the coding style
that's in play now.  for example,

  #define setcc(cc) ({ \
    partial_status &= ~(SW_C0|SW_C1|SW_C2|SW_C3); \
    partial_status |= (cc) & (SW_C0|SW_C1|SW_C2|SW_C3); })

This _does_ return a value though, bad example.


Segher

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Explain a second alternative for multi-line macros.
    • From: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH] Documentation: Explain a second alternative for multi-line macros.
    • From: "Robert P. J. Day" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Explain a second alternative for multi-line macros.
    • From: Muli Ben-Yehuda <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Explain a second alternative for multi-line macros.
    • From: "Robert P. J. Day" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Raid 0 Swap?
• Next by Date: Re: Happy New Year (and v2.6.20-rc3 released)
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Explain a second alternative for multi-line macros.
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Explain a second alternative for multi-line macros.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]