[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: iterator macros and requiring gcc >= 3.0 and -std=c9x

From: Marcus Brinkmann
Subject: Re: iterator macros and requiring gcc >= 3.0 and -std=c9x
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 22:16:21 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.4i

On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 06:23:37PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> Even if C99 lets you declare the variable in the for loop (eliminating
> the need for a user-declaration), it still seems cleaner to pass the
> name of the variable to be declared as a macro argument.
> That way the name `driver' isn't magic.  It also lets the user nest your
> construct (however silly that may be...).

I agree in general.  In this case though, the macro is only used internally
(eg, the user is the same program as the one that defines the macro), and it
is just more convenient to have it completely automagic.


`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' GNU    address@hidden
Marcus Brinkmann              The Hurd

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]