Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments |
| Date | 2015-06-02 11:06 +0100 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <874mmq4e77.fsf@bsb.me.uk> (permalink) |
| References | (8 earlier) <ce45f467-6f93-415e-b23f-abd26728bf7e@googlegroups.com> <874mmsh71s.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <60286786-f055-4e03-b904-65b7de764273@googlegroups.com> <87a8wj3r1e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <mkjt2g$5va$1@dont-email.me> |
Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > On 02/06/2015 01:14, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >> David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> writes: > >>> (1) I thought this was trivial because I read # as ##. My error. Of >>> course, I can't. # Only means something in a macro with arguments. >>> Having never used # I haven't thought about it and how, if possible, >>> to do it without the # >> >> So do you still think that # is useful (and hence you accept that macro >> arguments are useful) or do you think # can be thrown under the bus just >> to your desire to avoid macros with arguments? > > Clearly # isn't useful if it's only meaningful for macro arguments and > the aim is to avoid macro arguments. Yes, clearly. I don't think we disagree on this. David Kleinecke said that macro arguments are not needed but also that # and ## (as *operators*) are useful. He says he read # as ##, but that does not clear up what he thinks about uses of # -- it just means he's not yet said anything about it having misread it as ##. Is using # an exception to his silly rule about macros with arguments or does he think it's not useful? I may, one day, find out. <snip> >>> (2) I don't see why the general way of removing arguments wont work >>> >>> #define B_1 PAT_ ## X__ >>> #define B_2 PAT_ ## __X >>> #define B 0x ## B_1 ## B_2 >>> >>> I did that in a hurry and may have made mistakes but you get the >>> general idea. >> >> No, I don't. I asked because I can't see the genera idea of how to >> avoid the perfectly innocent feature that you've arbitrarily decided to >> rule out. I need you to explain how to do it (ideally with code, so >> everyone can compare the two). > > Macro arguments would be avoided in the same way they would be in any > other language without macro arguments. He's already given > alternatives for MAX. MAX does not use ## so it can't possibly help explain DK's position here. DK (a) thinks # and ## are useful (though maybe only ##); (b) does not want to change C; and (c) says that macros arguments are not needed. This is the puzzle. By the way, do you agree with DK about any of these points? Do you actually agree that his frankly daft alternative to MAX makes the code better? <snip> -- Ben.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-29 10:36 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-29 19:04 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-30 07:30 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-30 15:51 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-29 19:26 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-30 07:38 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-30 21:44 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-30 23:58 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-31 00:27 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-31 10:21 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-31 11:00 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-31 09:45 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-31 18:20 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-31 13:04 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2015-05-31 16:11 -0400
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-31 21:48 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-31 14:22 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-01 11:33 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-31 20:37 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-31 14:18 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-31 22:44 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-31 23:16 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-01 11:58 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-02 01:14 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-02 10:31 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-02 11:06 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-02 11:39 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-02 04:02 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-02 12:24 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-06-02 15:41 +0200
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-02 15:00 +0100
Re: Trolls/Cranks/Kooks Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-06-02 16:41 +0200
Re: Trolls/Cranks/Kooks Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-02 15:56 +0100
Re: Trolls/Cranks/Kooks Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-06-02 17:09 +0200
Re: Trolls/Cranks/Kooks Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-02 16:17 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-02 15:58 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Dr Nick <nospam-4@temporary-address.org.uk> - 2015-06-02 19:32 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-02 11:00 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-02 20:13 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-30 15:17 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-31 09:12 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-31 13:29 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-31 17:28 +0200
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-29 13:35 -0500
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-05-29 13:19 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-05-29 13:25 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2015-05-29 14:23 -0600
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-29 14:16 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-30 07:46 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2015-05-30 18:28 -0400
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-31 09:27 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-31 17:59 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-01 11:24 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-01 12:15 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-01 12:21 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-01 12:53 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-31 13:36 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-31 23:26 +0200
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-31 23:09 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-05-31 15:51 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-01 12:08 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-01 12:38 -0400
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Dr Nick <nospam-4@temporary-address.org.uk> - 2015-06-01 19:20 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-01 12:18 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-30 15:43 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-31 09:32 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-05-29 22:07 -0500
Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com - 2015-05-30 09:22 -0700
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-30 14:22 -0500
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-30 21:29 +0100
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-30 22:15 -0500
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-06-08 20:16 -0500
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-31 17:32 +0200
Re: Making C more beautiful by not using macros with arguments Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-01 22:51 +0100
csiph-web