linux-kernel - Re: macros: "do-while" versus "({ })" and a compile-time error

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0701091415200.12545@chaos.analogic.com>
Date:	Tue, 9 Jan 2007 14:23:01 -0500
From:	"linux-os \(Dick Johnson\)" <linux-os@...logic.com>
To:	"Stefan Richter" <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
Cc:	"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>,
	"Linux kernel mailing list" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: macros:  "do-while" versus "({ })" and a compile-time error

On Tue, 9 Jan 2007, Stefan Richter wrote:

> Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>>   just to stir the pot a bit regarding the discussion of the two
>> different ways to define macros,
>
> You mean function-like macros, right?
>
>> i've just noticed that the "({ })"
>> notation is not universally acceptable.  i've seen examples where
>> using that notation causes gcc to produce:
>>
>>   error: braced-group within expression allowed only inside a function
>
> And function calls and macros which expand to "do { expr; } while (0)"
> won't work anywhere outside of functions either.
>
>> i wasn't aware that there were limits on this notation.  can someone
>> clarify this?  under what circumstances *can't* you use that notation?
>> thanks.
>
> The limitations are certainly highly compiler-specific.

I don't think so. You certainly couldn't write working 'C' code like
this:

 	do { a = 1; } while(0);

This _needs_ to be inside a function. In fact any runtime operations
need to be inside functions. It's only in assembly that you could
'roll your own' code like:

main:
 	ret 0

Most of these errors come about as a result of changes where a macro
used to define a constant. Later on, it was no longer a constant in
code that didn't actually get compiled during the testing.

Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.6.16.24 on an i686 machine (5592.72 BogoMips).
New book: http://www.AbominableFirebug.com/
_
..

****************************************************************
The information transmitted in this message is confidential and may be privileged.  Any review, retransmission, dissemination, or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please notify Analogic Corporation immediately - by replying to this message or by sending an email to DeliveryErrors@...logic.com - and destroy all copies of this information, including any attachments, without reading or disclosing them.

Thank you.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/