Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> writes: > On 07/22/2015 07:54 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: > >>> >>>> +#define error_setg(errp, fmt, ...) \ >>>> + error_setg_internal((errp), __FILE__, __LINE__, (fmt), ## __VA_ARGS__) >>>> +void error_setg_internal(Error **errp, const char *src, int line, >>>> + const char *fmt, ...) GCC_FMT_ATTR(4, 5); >>>> >>> >>>> +#define error_setg_errno(errp, os_error, fmt, ...) \ >>>> + error_setg_errno_internal((errp), __FILE__, __LINE__, (os_error), \ >>>> + (fmt), ## __VA_ARGS__) >>> >>> Nit - why the difference in \ alignment? >> >> I'm dense today... difference between where and where? > > one space after error_setg(), aligned to far right after error_setg_errno().
Normalized. >>> Nit - as used here, 'errp', 'fmt', and 'os_error' can be used >>> unambiguously; you don't need '(errp)' given the context of a >>> parenthesized comma-separated list (even if someone DID want to unusual >>> by passing in '(a,b)' with a comma operator for their 'errp' argument, >>> they'd have to supply the () because of the semantics of making the >>> macro call). >> >> I put parenthesis around macro parameters in the expansion pretty much >> unthinkingly, because thought is expensive :) > > Of course, it doesn't hurt semantically to leave them in, and if you > value the lower maintenance burden of less thinking, then the extra > typing is not something I will reject :) Thanks!
