[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Thoughts on replacing macros with static inline functions
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: Thoughts on replacing macros with static inline functions |
Date: |
Fri, 18 Nov 2022 14:00:30 +0200 |
> Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2022 12:31:59 +0100 (CET)
> From: xenodasein@tutanota.de
> Cc: Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com>, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org,
> pappasbrent@knights.ucf.edu
>
> Nov 18, 2022, 08:34 by eliz@gnu.org:
>
> >> #define XM_DRAG_REASON(originator, code) ((code) | ((originator) << 7))
> >> #define XM_DRAG_REASON_ORIGINATOR(reason) (((reason) & 0x80) ? 1 : 0)
> >> #define XM_DRAG_REASON_CODE(reason) ((reason) & 0x7f)
> >>
> >
> > The purpose of macros such as the above is to explain the meaning of
> > the code in human-readable terms. Replacing this by functions makes
> > no more sense than replacing "c = a + b;" with a function.
> >
>
> Right? Who needs a proper API when you can have paranoid parentheses
> macros with bit hackery!
Bitwise operations are first-class citizens in C code, so your sarcasm
is misguided.
- Thoughts on replacing macros with static inline functions, Brent Pappas, 2022/11/14
- Re: Thoughts on replacing macros with static inline functions, tomas, 2022/11/18
- Re: Thoughts on replacing macros with static inline functions, xenodasein, 2022/11/18
- Re: Thoughts on replacing macros with static inline functions, Stefan Monnier, 2022/11/18
- Re: Thoughts on replacing macros with static inline functions, Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide, 2022/11/18
Re: Thoughts on replacing macros with static inline functions, Po Lu, 2022/11/15
Re: Thoughts on replacing macros with static inline functions, Stefan Monnier, 2022/11/15