On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Tony Finch wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jan 2011, David Woodhouse wrote:
>>
>> Can we turn the ({ ... }) extension into a static inline function? Or is
>> that not sufficiently portable either?
>
> No, nested functions are not allowed in standard C.
>
> It looks to me like
On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 14:28 +, Tony Finch wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jan 2011, David Woodhouse wrote:
> >
> > Can we turn the ({ ... }) extension into a static inline function? Or is
> > that not sufficiently portable either?
>
> No, nested functions are not allowed in standard C.
Nested? I meant
s
On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 13:52 +, Tony Finch wrote:
>
> which is clearly bogus because on non-gcc it leads to syntax errors in
> many macros like the following and the ones I broke in memcheck.h
>
> #define RUNNING_ON_VALGRIND __extension__\
>({unsigned int _qzz_res;
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 8:53 AM, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 15:12 +, Tony Finch wrote:
> > Exim doesn't compile with Sun or HP CC since Valgrind support was
> > added. Although valgrind.h protects against usage on unsupported
> > platforms, memcheck.h uses the __extension
