Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Explain a second alternative for multi-line macros.

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...>
Cc: Segher Boessenkool <segher@...>, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@...>, Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@...>, Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...>, <trivial@...>
Date: Monday, January 1, 2007 - 11:37 am

On Dec 31 2006 19:23, Randy Dunlap wrote:

If people want to return something from a ({ }) construct, they should do it
explicitly, e.g.

#define setcc(cc) ({ \
	partial_status &= ~(SW_C0|SW_C1|SW_C2|SW_C3); \
	partial_status |= (cc) & (SW_C0|SW_C1|SW_C2|SW_C3); \
	partial_status; \
})


	-`J'
-- 
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH 4/5] remove CONFIG_KMOD, Rusty Russell, (Wed Dec 31, 8:00 pm)
Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Explain a second alternative for ..., Jan Engelhardt, (Mon Jan 1, 11:37 am)
Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Explain a second alternative for ..., Segher Boessenkool, (Mon Jan 1, 1:51 pm)