On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 06:51:10AM +0200, Duy Nguyen wrote: > >> +#define IN_PACK(obj) oe_in_pack(&to_pack, obj) > > > > How come this one gets a macro, but the earlier conversions don't? > > > > I guess the problem is that oe_in_pack() is defined in the generic > > pack-objects.h, but &to_pack is only in builtin/pack-objects.c? > > > > I wonder if it would be that bad to just say oe_in_pack(&to_pack, obj) > > everywhere. It's longer, but it makes the code slightly less magical to > > read. > > Longer was exactly why I added these macros (with the hope that the > macro upper case names already ring a "it's magical" bell). Should I > drop all these macros? Some code becomes a lot more verbose though.
I'm on the fence. I agree that the macro screams "magical". I just sometimes see a macro and think something really weird and unfunction-like is going on. But really we're just replacing a default parameter. So I dunno. If you get rid of the macros and I look at it, I give even odds that I'll say "yech, put them back!". :) -Peff
