Re: Sick macros (was: Action, not words (Re: bug (?) in 3.0-pre1))

["Bart Schaefer" <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Jul 2,  7:24pm, Zefram wrote:
} Subject: Re: Sick macros (was: Action, not words (Re: bug (?) in 3.0-pre1)
}
} I think the size of the resulting patch should not be a consideration.

I don't either, now that I've convinced people this is a good idea. :-)
Before, I didn't want to scare anyone off by making this look like a
major code change.

} >I know for a fact that AIX could not handle
} >an `if (x,y)' construct we used in zmail, forcing us to rewrite it
} >as `if (x?0:y)'
} 
} Curious.  It's a perfectly legal expression, so any compiler that can't
} grok it is broken.

Oh, the compiler grokked it, but then generated buggy assembly code so that
it didn't work right.

-- 
Bart Schaefer                             Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts            http://www.nbn.com/people/lantern

New male in /home/schaefer:
>N  2 Justin William Schaefer  Sat May 11 03:43  53/4040  "Happy Birthday"