[ros-dev] Re: [ros-svn] [gdalsnes] 18113:-reorderInsertXscendingOrder macro argument order and update uses

[Richard Campbell]

And there are methods other then using goto that allow for common 
cleanup.  One such example is:

int somefunction()
{
    BOOL bSuccess;

    if ( someotherfunction(arg) )
    {
        if ( yetanotherfunction(arg) )
        {
            bSuccess = TRUE;
        }
    }
    CleanUpCode;
}

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.
>
> G.
> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev at reactos.com
> http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>