On 5/17/07, Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2007, jerry gay wrote:
> good comments... but why keep both function and macro? which would you
> prefer keeping over the other, and why? i can't understand why both
> exist.
In src/debug.c, for handling user input, I don't s
On Wed, 16 May 2007, jerry gay wrote:
> good comments... but why keep both function and macro? which would you
> prefer keeping over the other, and why? i can't understand why both
> exist.
In src/debug.c, for handling user input, I don't see any particular
advantage to the macro version. The f
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 09:36:48AM -0700, jerry gay wrote:
> good comments... but why keep both function and macro? which would you
> prefer keeping over the other, and why? i can't understand why both
> exist.
Yes, sorry, I sort of missed that part.
Er. I don't know. One deserves to die.
Nichol
On 5/16/07, Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 08:45:04AM -0700, jerry gay wrote:
> here's a macro to move to the next argument (kjs mentioned in an
> earlier thread that this isn't a descriptive name)
>
> /* na(c) [Next Argument (Char pointer)]
> *
> * Moves t
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 08:45:04AM -0700, jerry gay wrote:
> here's a macro to move to the next argument (kjs mentioned in an
> earlier thread that this isn't a descriptive name)
>
> /* na(c) [Next Argument (Char pointer)]
> *
> * Moves the pointer to the next argument in the user input.
>
