lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Aug]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: macro conflict
Hi,

"Magnus Naeslund(f)" wrote:

> > min(x,y) = ({typeof((x)) __x=(x), __y=(y); (__x < __y) ? __x : __y})
> >
> > That gets you the correct "evaluate the args once" semantics and gives
> > you control over typing (the comparison is done in the type of the
> > first argument) and we don't have to change a zillion drivers.
> >
> > (typeof() is a gcc extension.)

({...}) is also gcc extension.

> But then again, how do you know it's the type of x we want, maybe we want
> type of y, that is and signed char (not an int like x).
> Talk about hidden buffer overflow stuff :)

That's the reason I'm using this macro for affs:

#define MIN(a, b) ({ \
typeof(a) _a = (a); \
typeof(b) _b = (b); \
_a < _b ? _a : _b; \
})

I need a very good reason to use something else, so far I'm unconvinced.

bye, Roman
-
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: 2005-03-22 12:58    [W:0.099 / U:0.104 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site