Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 8 Aug 2004 14:36:31 -0700 | From | "Randy.Dunlap" <> | Subject | Re: [ACPI] Re: [PATCH] cleanup ACPI numa warnings |
| |
On Sat, 7 Aug 2004 10:57:29 -0700 Paul Jackson wrote:
| > And there's nothing in CodingStyle that agrees with you that I could find. | | >From the file Documentation/SubmittingPatches: | | 3) 'static inline' is better than a macro | | Static inline functions are greatly preferred over macros. | They provide type safety, have no length limitations, no formatting | limitations, and under gcc they are as cheap as macros. | | Macros should only be used for cases where a static inline is clearly | suboptimal [there a few, isolated cases of this in fast paths], | or where it is impossible to use a static inline function [such as | string-izing].
Oops. Thanks, Paul.
I agree that the inline looks better than the macro (more readable, possibly more maintainable), but not that the multi-line macro is _evil_ (which is what Martin said).
-- ~Randy - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |