On Tue, 23 Mar 2021 09:53:54 GMT, Andrew Haley <a...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>>> @theRealAph, could you elaborate on what is need to be done for [#2200 >>> (review)](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/2200#pullrequestreview-600597066). >> >> I think that what you've got now is fine. > >> _Mailing list message from [Andrew Haley](mailto:a...@redhat.com) on >> [build-dev](mailto:build-...@openjdk.java.net):_ >> >> On 3/15/21 6:56 PM, Anton Kozlov wrote: >> >> > On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 11:21:44 GMT, Andrew Haley <aph at openjdk.org> wrote: >> > > > We always check for `R18_RESERVED` with `#if(n)def`, is there any >> > > > reason to define the value for the macro? >> > > >> > > >> > > Robustness, clarity, maintainability, convention. Why not? >> > >> > >> > I've tried to implement the suggestion, but it pulled more unnecessary >> > changes. It makes the intended way to check the condition less clear >> > (`#ifdef` and not `#if`). >> >> No, no, no! I am not suggesting you change anything else, just that >> you do not define contentless macros. You might as well define it >> to be something, and true is a reasonable default, that's all. It's >> not terribly important, it's just good practice. > > I'm quite prepared to drop this if it's holding up the port. It's a style > thing, but it's not critical. So, where are we up to now? Are we done yet? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/2200
