Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 07:38:23 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: eivind@FreeBSD.ORG (Eivind Eklund) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), bp@butya.kz (Boris Popov), freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: vnode interlock API Message-ID: <200102140738.AAA20903@usr08.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <20010213165159.A76093@thinksec.com> from "Eivind Eklund" at Feb 13, 2001 04:51:59 PM
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> This is not an issue. You can get a block that behaves as a single statement
> by doing do { ... } while (0), and this is the recommended way of writing
> blocks in macros (so the macros behaves like single statements instead of
> blocks.)
>
> Please do NOT introduce pure statement block wrapped macros. They make for
> strange semantics, and we are trying to get rid of them.
The point was to block them; I personally prefer the
"{ ... } while(0)" semantics, but the important thing is
to allow the use of multiple statements, of course, so
your correction is welcome, but it's the ability to add
statements later that's important here. This wasn't being
done.
Terry Lambert
terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200102140738.AAA20903>