From: Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:10:19 -0500
On Mar 11, 2008, at 8:08 PM, Bob Rogers wrote:
> 0xdeadbeef is odd, so it doesn't even have word alignment on
> byte-addressable machines. So you don't even have to check on most
> architectures. True?
On Mar 11, 2008, at 8:08 PM, Bob Rogers wrote:
0xdeadbeef is odd, so it doesn't even have word alignment on
byte-addressable machines. So you don't even have to check on most
architectures. True?
The word "most" frightens me.
--
Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.petdance.com => AIM:
From: Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:01:07 -0500
On Mar 11, 2008, at 6:12 PM, Geoffrey Broadwell wrote:
> I'm confused here. My understanding of the difference between
> PARROT_ASSERT and the PARROT_ASSERT_POINTER suggestion is that the
> former check
On Mar 11, 2008, at 6:12 PM, Geoffrey Broadwell wrote:
I'm confused here. My understanding of the difference between
PARROT_ASSERT and the PARROT_ASSERT_POINTER suggestion is that the
former checks for truth, and the other would check for lack of obvious
insanity.
A pointer of 0 is always,
On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 23:01 +0100, Ron Blaschke wrote:
> Andy Lester wrote:
> >
> > On Mar 11, 2008, at 2:43 PM, Ron Blaschke wrote:
> >
> >> It ties pointers to INTVALs, which I guess it shouldn't.
> >
> >
> > As I read the mail, it seems like the only problem we have is in casting
> > the po
Andy Lester wrote:
On Mar 11, 2008, at 2:43 PM, Ron Blaschke wrote:
It ties pointers to INTVALs, which I guess it shouldn't.
As I read the mail, it seems like the only problem we have is in casting
the pointer to an int to find its truthiness. I'd say use the !!(x) and
be done with it.
Am Dienstag, 11. März 2008 22:39 schrieb Ron Blaschke:
> > if (!x) \
There were of course some parens missing ...
if (!(x)) \
leo
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Am Dienstag, 11. März 2008 20:43 schrieb Ron Blaschke:
void
Parrot_assert(INTVAL condition, ARGIN(const char *condition_string),
ARGIN(const char *file), unsigned int line)
...
PARROT_ASSERT is used to assert pointers too, for example in src/string.c:
What abou
Am Dienstag, 11. März 2008 20:43 schrieb Ron Blaschke:
> void
> Parrot_assert(INTVAL condition, ARGIN(const char *condition_string),
> ARGIN(const char *file), unsigned int line)
> ...
>
> PARROT_ASSERT is used to assert pointers too, for example in src/string.c:
What about making Parrot_
On Mar 11, 2008, at 2:43 PM, Ron Blaschke wrote:
It ties pointers to INTVALs, which I guess it shouldn't.
As I read the mail, it seems like the only problem we have is in
casting the pointer to an int to find its truthiness. I'd say use
the !!(x) and be done with it. The PARROT_ASSERT_
PARROT_ASSERT is currently defined as:
#ifdef NDEBUG
# define PARROT_ASSERT(x) ((void)0)
#else
# define PARROT_ASSERT(x) Parrot_assert((INTVAL)(x), #x, __FILE__,
__LINE__)
#endif
with
void
Parrot_assert(INTVAL condition, ARGIN(const char *condition_string),
ARGIN(const char *file),
11 matches
Mail list logo
