On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 16:34 -0400, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> David,
>
> Well, I probably don't have a NEED for it. I've gotten along for 25+
> years without it. :-)
>
> However, what prompted my inquiry is using it would've saved me tracking
> down a few bugs in recent weeks. Some prior code was re-used for a
> similar function, but the name of the recursive calls weren't updated in
> every case. It didn't take long to debug, but I realized that had it
> always been written as self() it never would've been an issue.
>
> I can also see a use for generated code where there's a base source code
> template in use with an embedded include file reference that changes as
> it's generated per pass, such as:
>
> int step1(int a, int b)
> {
> #include "\current_task\step1.cpp"
> }
>
> int step2(int a, int b)
> {
> #include "\current_task\step2.cpp"
> }
>
> Using the self() reference for recursion, one could modify stepN.cpp's
> generator algorithms without having to know or care anything in the
> wrapper code.
Wouldn't this do?
#define __self__ step1
int __self__ (int a, int b)
{
#include "something"
__self__ (x, y);
}
#undef __self__
Cheers,
Oleg
