Bah. Forgot to remove html.
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Diego Novillo <dnovi...@google.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:03 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> <bilbotheelffri...@gmail.com> 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-effects
>> b) macro does not modify the arguments.
>> c) macro does not use any preprocessor operators (like ##)
>> d) macro does not get undefined or is conditionally defined.
>> e) macro is not type independent (use inline template for these?)
>> f) Any other case ?
>>
>> Example:
>> Consider C_EXPR_APPEND macro defined in c-tree.h:
>>
>> /* Append a new c_expr_t element to V. */
>> #define C_EXPR_APPEND(V, ELEM) \
>> do { \
>> c_expr_t __elem = (ELEM); \
>> vec_safe_push (V, __elem); \
>> } while (0)
>>
>
> Yes, it's a good idea. One thing you will likely need to do, however, is to
> add some of the replaced functions into gdb's list of ignored inline
> functions. Some folks are used to gdb stepping over macro calls when 's' is
> used.
>
> Not all macros need to be turned into functions. Some can be completely
> removed (Trevor mentions an example in his reply).
>
>
> Diego.
