Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: interpret this code? |
| Date | 2012-06-05 14:42 +0100 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <jql2c2$efi$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <30urs79vrgihohjaoca4g3bj1kfbcqa5jk@4ax.com> |
"George" <gbeccles@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:30urs79vrgihohjaoca4g3bj1kfbcqa5jk@4ax.com...
> I'm working on an old (comment-free) program, and finding some of the
> code is above my pay grade.
Or possibly just below it. Code shouldn't be unnecessarily obscure. Not if
someone else needs to make head or tail of it.
> I think the final result wants to be ...
> const void (*ScrnFnc[])() = {
> NullScrnFnc,
> RYGScrnFnc,
> ...
> DefaultInitFnc,
> LastNInitFnc,
> ...
> };
>
> Even assuming that's correct, I don't see how it gets there. I see that
> SCRN_LIST/INIT_LIST will cause ea of their listed arguments (Null, RYG,
> etc) to instantiate the 'SCRN'/'INIT' macros in the ScrnFnc[]
> declaration, But, ISTM, this would create something like (eg) ...
> void (*NullFnc)()
I passed the code through a compiler option to generate the output of the
preprocessor (-E on gcc). The output, with editing to improve the layout,
is:
const VOID_FNC ScrnFnc[] = {
(const VOID_FNC)NullScrnFnc,
(const VOID_FNC)RYGScrnFnc,
(const VOID_FNC)Fr00ScrnFnc,
(const VOID_FNC)LastNScrnFnc,
(const VOID_FNC)DateTimeScrnFnc,
(const VOID_FNC)DefaultInitFnc,
(const VOID_FNC)LastNInitFnc,
(const VOID_FNC)EvtLogInitFnc,
(const VOID_FNC)EvtLogDetailInitFnc,
};
Now why couldn't it have looked like that in the first place?
--
Bartc
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
interpret this code? George <gbeccles@verizon.net> - 2012-06-05 08:26 -0400
Re: interpret this code? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-05 09:19 -0400
Re: interpret this code? Nick Bowler <nbowler@draconx.ca> - 2012-06-05 15:55 +0000
Re: interpret this code? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-05 12:05 -0400
Re: interpret this code? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-05 14:42 +0100
Re: interpret this code? Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2012-06-05 16:19 +0200
Re: interpret this code? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-06-05 14:43 +0100
Re: interpret this code? Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2012-06-05 16:22 +0200
Re: interpret this code? George <gbeccles@verizon.net> - 2012-06-05 22:50 -0400
csiph-web