On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 1:17 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:03 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>>
>> I was wondering if it was a good idea to replace do-while macros with
>> static inline functions returning void, where appropriate ?
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 02:42:23PM -0500, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 08:33:03PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> > I was wondering if it was a good idea to replace do-while macros with
> > static inline functions returning void, where appropriate
Bah. Forgot to remove html.
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:03 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>>
>> I was wondering if it was a good idea to replace do-while macros with
>> static inline functions
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 08:33:03PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> I was wondering if it was a good idea to replace do-while macros with
> static inline functions returning void, where appropriate ?
> By "where appropriate" I mean:
> a) call to macro contains no side-e
I was wondering if it was a good idea to replace do-while macros with
static inline functions returning void, where appropriate ?
By "where appropriate" I mean:
a) call to macro contains no side-effects
b) macro does not modify the arguments.
c) macro does not use any preprocessor opera
