[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Proposal: immediate strings
From: |
Ken Raeburn |
Subject: |
Re: Proposal: immediate strings |
Date: |
Thu, 24 May 2012 01:41:14 -0400 |
On May 24, 2012, at 01:17, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> +#define SDATA(string) (XSTRING (string)->u.imm.immbit ? \
>> + (XSTRING (string)->u.imm.data + 0) : \
>> + (XSTRING (string)->u.dat.data + 0))
>
> IIUC the "+ 0" are unneeded here, because using a "..?..:.." already
> makes sure we have an rvalue. Same for SCHARS.
FWIW, there used to be a GCC extension that caused the ternary operator to be
an lvalue if both the second and third operands were lvalues. I'm not sure
when it was removed; possible in 4.0, which might be old enough that we can
ignore it...
Ken
- Proposal: immediate strings, Dmitry Antipov, 2012/05/22
- Re: Proposal: immediate strings, Miles Bader, 2012/05/22
- Re: Proposal: immediate strings, Stefan Monnier, 2012/05/24
- Re: Proposal: immediate strings,
Ken Raeburn <=
- Re: Proposal: immediate strings, Paul Eggert, 2012/05/24
- Re: Proposal: immediate strings, Stefan Monnier, 2012/05/24
- Re: Proposal: immediate strings, Paul Eggert, 2012/05/24
- Re: Proposal: immediate strings, Stefan Monnier, 2012/05/24
- Re: Proposal: immediate strings, Paul Eggert, 2012/05/24
- Re: Proposal: immediate strings, Dmitry Antipov, 2012/05/25
- Re: Proposal: immediate strings, Paul Eggert, 2012/05/25
- Re: Proposal: immediate strings, Dmitry Antipov, 2012/05/28
- Re: Proposal: immediate strings, Stefan Monnier, 2012/05/28