Wolfgang Denk,
On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 12:35 AM, Wolfgang Denk wd@denx.de wrote:
Dear Vadim Bendebury,
In message CANy1bu+DZmD_Z=AU8LdTUy7ewHfwMU-8PvH1OA1jba9Tz1xuxA@mail.gmail.com you wrote:
I am not sure what is wrong with a short macro in this case - is this against the coding style?
It doesn't do typechecking.
but the code around it does, doesn't it?
I explained this yesterday, too. Functions are preferred over macros. In this case ther eis no reason not to use a function.
Sorry, as I said, I am new here: how does this work on this project - does the submitter have to agree to all reviewer's comments? Can I ask
No, you don't have to agree. But we also don't have to accept code that we don't like ;-)
certainly, but wouldn't you risk to throw the baby out with the bath water this way? ;-)
Also, what about situations when one reviewer requests a certain implementation and another one finds it inappropriate?
somebody else to confirm that using a macro in this case in inappropriate?
I already did.
Thank you, I will fix this.
Can you please also confirm that having a structure with a single element as an array is "weird" and must be changed to passing around a pointer to a single element without the size (or maybe the idea is that the pointer AND the size need to be passed around)?
Are macros acceptable to wrap input output with debug messages, as was suggested earlier on this list, or should I replace each macro with two inline functions?
Please advise, cheers, /vb
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
-- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@denx.de The average woman would rather have beauty than brains, because the average man can see better than he can think. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot