![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Joe Perches wrote: > On Tue, 2007-02-13 at 15:19 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > >>>> #define array_for_each(element, array) \ >>>> for (int __idx = 0; __idx < ARRAY_SIZE((array)); \ >>>> __idx++, (element) = &(array[__idx])) >> >>If you really wanted to introduce your loop, then please call it >>array_for_each_idx, or something to distinguish it. > > > perhaps: > > #define array_for_each(element, array) \ > for ((element) = (array); \ > (element) < ((array) + ARRAY_SIZE((array))); \ > (element)++) If you're going for consistency, then shouldn't this be array_for_each_entry()? > #define array_for_each_index(index, array) \ > for ((index) = 0; (index) < ARRAY_SIZE((array)); (index)++) -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2007-02-13 08:45 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||