On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 03:34:45PM +0300, Lauri Alanko wrote: > > In fact, function-like > macros are (or should be) a rarity, since inline functions serve the > same purpose better. > > So to me "capi" seems to buy very little, and it only supports > strangely specific needs.
In theory, perhaps. In practice, at least one platform defining a standard function with something like #define fopen fopen64 is common, and I think the standard explicitly allows many such functions to be defined as macros. We certainly use capi a lot in the standard libraries. Thanks Ian _______________________________________________ FFI mailing list FFI@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ffi