Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 17:47:54 -0700 From: Marcel Moolenaar <xcllnt@mac.com> To: Max Laier <max@love2party.net> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org, Romuald Conty <romuald.conty@free.fr>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Romain_Tarti=E8re?= <romain@blogreen.org> Subject: Re: indent(1) support for gcc(1) 0b prefix Message-ID: <5E2E3A08-A12E-4AF6-893D-20A44AC205AF@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <200804270201.53271.max@love2party.net> References: <20080426213557.GA88577@marvin.blogreen.org> <200804270201.53271.max@love2party.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Apr 26, 2008, at 5:01 PM, Max Laier wrote: > On Saturday 26 April 2008 23:35:57 Romain Tarti=E8re wrote: >> Hello FreeBSD hackers! >> >> I'm using avr-gcc from the ports and relying on the 0b prefix =20 >> notation >> for binary constants, that is: >> >> foo =3D 0b00101010; >> >> Thanks to /usr/ports/devel/avr-gcc/files/patch-0b-constants this is >> possible :-) >> >> But I would like to use indent(1) to reformat contributed code >> automatically. Unfortunately, the 0b notation is not supported by =20 >> that >> program, and the resulting code looks like this: >> >> foo =3D 0 b00101010; >> >> ... then compilation fails, bla bla bla... > > I can't think of a case (outside of "0x...." context) where "...0b..." > would be valid C code, let alone better formated as "...0 b...". =20 > Hence I > see no harm in adding your patch to the base indent(1). > > Does anyone have an example where "...0 b..." is valid C code? Well, if b... is a preprocessor define then you can easily come up with valid C: #define b... *2 then: ...0 b... becomes: ...0 *2 That's a valid expression in the right context... FYI, --=20 Marcel Moolenaar xcllnt@mac.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5E2E3A08-A12E-4AF6-893D-20A44AC205AF>