On Mo, 2014-12-08 at 18:10 -0500, Ben Boeckel wrote: > On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 22:14:16 +0100, Jörg Krause wrote: > > FYI: This is the statement of a musl maintainer about this issue: > > http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2014/12/08/15 > > That is…unfortunate. Macros are basically evil and with this kind of > attitude, anytime I use a standard C library, POSIX, etc. function from > C++, I have to first #undef it to make sure I get the right one to be > "portable" :/ . IMO, if that's the level of burden to be portable to > your C library, you can keep your patches (nb. I'm not an mpd dev, so > this opinion isn't binding here). Not to mention that macros have > approximately zero support for usage inside of C++'s std algorithms (or > C's limited selection for that matter). > > I'd say drop the '::' since it's a C function, not a C++ function, but > that's just me. > > --Ben
So I started a musl discussion by accident... I wouldn't say that macros are basically evil. They are used heavily in embedded systems. And you can do some nice things like stringification. _______________________________________________ mpd-devel mailing list mpd-devel@musicpd.org http://mailman.blarg.de/listinfo/mpd-devel
