Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:38:29 -0500 (EST) | From | Steven Rostedt <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] clarify usage expectations for cnt32_to_63() |
| |
On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:15:32 -0500 (EST) > Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> wrote: > > > > > > This references its second argument twice, which can cause correctness > > > or efficiency problems. > > > > > > There is no reason that this had to be implemented in cpp. > > > Implementing it in C will fix the above problem. > > > > No, it won't, for correctness and efficiency reasons. > > > > And I've explained why already. > > I'd be very surprised if you've really found a case where a macro is > faster than an inlined function. I don't think that has happened > before.
But that's the way my Grandpa did it. With macros!
-- Steve
| |