From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Oct 23 10:42:25 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from peter3.wemm.org (c1315225-a.plstn1.sfba.home.com [24.14.150.180]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1260D37B405; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:42:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from overcee.netplex.com.au (overcee.wemm.org [10.0.0.3]) by peter3.wemm.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f9NHgKM31830; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:42:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from wemm.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by overcee.netplex.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA0EB380A; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:42:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: John Baldwin Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: getenv_foo and TUNABLE_FOO_FETCH change In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:42:20 -0700 From: Peter Wemm Message-Id: <20011023174220.BA0EB380A@overcee.netplex.com.au> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG John Baldwin wrote: > Also, one final note about using do { } while(0). If you actually read > style(9), you will see that you are supposed to use it for compound statement s, > not just for any macro that happens to be more than one line long. If the > macro's body is a single statement, it doesn't need the do { } while (0) bit. It was there so that the macro didn't have a "value". Since you're changing this so they all have a meaningful return (eg: TUNABLE_STR_FETCH() did not before) then removing this makes sense. Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; peter@netplex.com.au "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message