[lkml]   [2001]   [Aug]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: 2.4.9 does not compile [PATCH]
From said:
> Really? Could you point out an example where using ... typeof(x) __x;
> typeof(y) __y; ... in the macros wouldn't work? - I just tried a few
> examples I thought wouldn't work (side-effects ones) but I was
> pleasantly surprised to that gcc always produced the exact same
> assembler output for both the 3 arg and the 2 arg + typeof macros.

Try min(a, min(b, c)). Look at the cpp expansion and notice all the variable
name clashes.

We went through this on #kernel one night, and Alan concocted some amazingly
gross unique identifier generators as a result. To me, this looks like the
best way to do this.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:57    [W:0.070 / U:0.964 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site