[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE : RE : RE : RE : [lwip-devel] Can we remove pbuf_init()
From: |
Frédéric BERNON |
Subject: |
RE : RE : RE : RE : [lwip-devel] Can we remove pbuf_init() |
Date: |
Sun, 29 Jul 2007 12:06:26 +0200 |
http://vivekkutal.blogspot.com/2006/03/do-while0.html give a explain of the
semicolon problem you talk (not the same I thought). Now, I understand, even if
with current lwIP coding style (where we put brackets for each "if", "while",
etc... even with one line in the "block"), I think such problem can't happen...
Thank you for this explain...
====================================
Frédéric BERNON
HYMATOM SA
Chef de projet informatique
Microsoft Certified Professional
Tél. : +33 (0)4-67-87-61-10
Fax. : +33 (0)4-67-70-85-44
Email : address@hidden
Web Site : http://www.hymatom.fr
====================================
P Avant d'imprimer, penser à l'environnement
-----Message d'origine-----
De : address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden De la part de Frédéric BERNON
Envoyé : vendredi 27 juillet 2007 17:22
À : lwip-devel
Objet : RE : RE : RE : [lwip-devel] Can we remove pbuf_init()
With such code, like for LWIP_DEBUGF, I got with TCS5.01 (NXP compiler for
Nexperia DSP) :
"src\api\api_lib.c", line 706: warning: controlling expression is constant
LWIP_DEBUGF(API_LIB_DEBUG, ("netconn_send: sending %d bytes\n",
buf->p->tot_len));
^
>Some times a semi-colon by itself can be a problem, and makes some
>compilers warn.
Most of time, it only true for semi-colon inside a typedef/struct (that's why
there is a such strange thing for IP_PCB_ADDRHINT in ip.h). In code, this is
not a problem. Last, this is not the usual coding style on most of lwIP files
(see sys.h; tcp.h, etc..), except in one or two cases: debug.h and... tcp.h
(which seems to use the both). My preference would be to change these
exceptions to the more generic use in current code.
====================================
Frédéric BERNON
HYMATOM SA
Chef de projet informatique
Microsoft Certified Professional
Tél. : +33 (0)4-67-87-61-10
Fax. : +33 (0)4-67-70-85-44
Email : address@hidden
Web Site : http://www.hymatom.fr
====================================
P Avant d'imprimer, penser à l'environnement
-----Message d'origine-----
De : address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden De la part de Jonathan Larmour
Envoyé : vendredi 27 juillet 2007 17:10 À : lwip-devel Objet : Re: RE : RE :
[lwip-devel] Can we remove pbuf_init()
Frédéric BERNON wrote:
>>#define pbuf_init() do { } while (0)
>
> I'm always suprised about this kind of macro (the do/while(0)). Most
> of
>
time, it's generate lot of warnings. Of couse, it's perhaps compiler-dependant.
I don't understand why don't write "define pbuf_init()" ? Can you explain me
when/why such code writing ?
Some times a semi-colon by itself can be a problem, and makes some
compilers warn.
Wrapping a function-like macro in do/while (0) (which allows the
following-semicolon to be parsed validly) is very common, and I'm
surprised any compiler warns about it.
Jifl
--
eCosCentric Limited http://www.eCosCentric.com/ The eCos experts
Barnwell House, Barnwell Drive, Cambridge, UK. Tel: +44 1223 245571
Registered in England and Wales: Reg No 4422071.
------["The best things in life aren't things."]------ Opinions==mine
_______________________________________________
lwip-devel mailing list
address@hidden http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-devel
Frédéric BERNON.vcf
Description: Frédéric BERNON.vcf
- RE : RE : RE : RE : [lwip-devel] Can we remove pbuf_init(),
Frédéric BERNON <=