Re: Use enum to declare errno values

2005/12/2, Pekka Enberg <[email protected]>:
> > I don't follow your reasoning. The naming collision is a real problem
> > with macros. With enum and const, the compiler can do proper checking
> > with meaningful error messages. Please explain why you think #define
> > is better for Denis' example?

On Fri, 2005-12-02 at 20:56 +0800, Coywolf Qi Hunt wrote:
> That is a bad bad style. It should be `#define FOO 123' if you have to
> write it.

Fair enough. And when you have two colliding constants, macros are
superior, because...?

			Pekka

-
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/

---

• References:
  • Use enum to declare errno values
    • From: moreau francis <[email protected]>
  • Re: Use enum to declare errno values
    • From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
  • Re: Use enum to declare errno values
    • From: "linux-os \(Dick Johnson\)" <[email protected]>
  • Re: Use enum to declare errno values
    • From: Denis Vlasenko <[email protected]>
  • Re: Use enum to declare errno values
    • From: Coywolf Qi Hunt <[email protected]>
  • Re: Use enum to declare errno values
    • From: Pekka Enberg <[email protected]>
  • Re: Use enum to declare errno values
    • From: Coywolf Qi Hunt <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Use enum to declare errno values
• Next by Date: Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related?
• Previous by thread: Re: Use enum to declare errno values
• Next by thread: Re: Use enum to declare errno values
• 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]