Re: [ros-svn] [gdalsnes] 18113:-reorderInsertXscendingOrder
macro argument order and update uses
eek2121 at comcast.net
Wed Sep 28 23:21:30 CEST 2005
And there are methods other then using goto that allow for common
cleanup. One such example is:
if ( someotherfunction(arg) )
if ( yetanotherfunction(arg) )
bSuccess = TRUE;
Anyways, back to the point. Most devs have already argued against the
idea of using macros. I say the discussion stops and we call a vote.
Gunnar Dalsnes wrote:
> Richard Campbell wrote:
>> Hate to throw my 2 cents in, but why use macros or goto statements at
>> all? None of the demonstrated code actually needs a goto statement
>> to work.
> Having common cleanup is _very_ good programming practice, and in lack
> of working/efficient try/finally i mean that using gotos and/or macros
> for this highy outweights the (alleged) bad practice of using gotos
> and/or macros.
>> Granted i've not seen the actual offensive code , but all examples
>> here can be written without goto statements or macros. Why bother
>> using either?
> Have a look at any medium to large function in ros and youll pretty
> fast find points of return (in case of error/fail) where it fails to
> do some cleanup. Having a common place for cleanup makes it easier to
> make this right.
> Example: kernel32\process\create.c:BasepInitializeEnvironment().
> return at line 496 & 574: fail to destroy proces params
>> At any rate, i'm inclined to agree that macros are a bad idea.
>> Hiding a mess behind a preprocessor is considered bad coding practice.
> Thats exactly what macros _should_ be used for. Hiding mess. Im sure
> macros, gotos etc. can be abused but imo this is not the case here.
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev at reactos.com
More information about the Ros-dev