This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: rfc: macros accepting constructors
- From: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at redhat dot com>
- To: Bo Thorsen <bo at sonofthor dot dk>
- Cc: Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>, Tim Hollebeek <tim at hollebeek dot com>, Joern Rennecke <joern dot rennecke at superh dot com>, jason at redhat dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, geoffk at redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 08:45:50 -0700
- Subject: Re: rfc: macros accepting constructors
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0206271315540.23942-100000@dberlin.org> <jeadpf2756.fsf@sykes.suse.de> <200206280951.19083.bo@sonofthor.dk>
> > foo(((vector int){0, 1, 2, 3}));
>
> I'm probably wrong, but to me it sounded like the guys where smoking the old
> "but macros should behave exactly like functions" pipe. Looks like the smoke
> haven't cleared yet.
well they should... especially since ansi says that library functions
(ahem, printf, strlen, etc), can be implemented as macros. they *should*
behave like functions.
and now with C99 bringing about these {aggregate initilizers}, this
are bound to get broken, if you pass them around.
oh well, it seems no one is agreeing with me on this one.
aldy