On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 04:41:28PM +0100, Ed Schouten wrote: > Hi Joerg, > > 2015-02-23 14:13 GMT+01:00 Joerg Sonnenberger <[email protected]>: > > As I said earlier, I think this is a regression in readability. Please > > expand __DECIMAL_DIG__ without intermediate macro. > > This is interesting. I cannot seem to find your reply in my mailbox, > nor in the list archives. Are you sure your email made it through > properly?
Moderately, yes. > Are you sure that expanding the macro directly would improve > readability? I would say that this is subjective. In my opinion > readability is improved by adding the indirection. It explicitly > encodes the relationship between DECIMAL_DIG and *_DECIMAL_DIG. The > former has been replaced by the latter. I have to read the output of $CC -dM often enough. Indirect in the output adds pain without providing any value. It even comes at a trivial, but non-zero run time impact for code using DECIMAL_DIG. Joerg _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
