On 26/10/2016 18:58, Jianjun Duan wrote: >> > >> > Seems you partially adopted Paolo's suggestion for improving the >> > macros. Is there a particular reason why you did not follow it more >> > closely? I find the solution with field_at_offset(base, offset, type) >> > more readable than with RAW_FIELD(base, offset). >> > > field_at_offset is too general. We only use (void **) and (void ***) > here.
Uhm, field_at_offset is exactly the same as RAW_FIELD. :) Paolo
