On 28 January 2013 18:54, Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote:
> Am 28.01.2013 19:22, schrieb Richard Henderson:
>> On 01/27/2013 05:32 AM, Andreas Färber wrote:
>>> +#define LOG_DISAS(...) G_STMT_START \
>>> + if (ALPHA_DEBUG_DISAS) { \
>>> + qemu_log_mask(CPU_LOG_TB_IN_ASM, ## __VA_ARGS__); \
>>> + } \
>>> + G_STMT_END
>>
>> I see zero advantage to using G_STMT_START/END over the
>> shorter and significantly more obvious direct use of do/while.
>
> Well, I see close to zero advantage in using a loop at all.
Er, what? "do ... while (0)" is completely standard practice
for writing robust macros in C. Patches which don't do that
should fail code review.
> An inline function by comparison would relieve us from
> all that \ ugliness, too.
This is a completely separate argument.
C macro with do..while(0): OK
inline function: also OK
C macro missing do..while(0) protection: not OK
C macro using glib obfuscated macros: also not OK
-- PMM
