Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Possible code defects: macros and precedence | From | Joe Perches <> | Date | Sun, 18 Sep 2016 02:31:50 -0700 |
| |
On Sun, 2016-09-18 at 07:09 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > On Sat, 17 Sep 2016, Joe Perches wrote: > > I also submitted a similar checkpatch addition that looks > > for non-comma operators used macro arguments in function > > definitions. > > > > The checkpatch test has the same weakness as the coccinelle > > test. It doesn't check uses, just the macro definition. > I wonder if it is really a weakness? Does anyone care if a macro > definition has more parentheses than what is necessary for the current > usage
An excess of parentheses can hurt readability a little.
| |