[ros-dev] VOTE: List loop macros in ntoskrnl?

Thomas Weidenmueller w3seek at reactos.com
Thu Sep 29 14:34:08 CEST 2005

Gunnar Dalsnes wrote:
> Magnus Olsen wrote:
>> I vote no
>> for it make the code harder to read and undertsand a bad example why
>> not use
>> maroc inntoskrnl see
>> file win32k/eng/gardine.c  go to middle of the file. and try figout
>> what the
>> hell going on there.
> But this is about the list macros. Are they a bad example of macro usage
> too?
> But what do you suggest as an improvement to the file you pointed out?
> Would you understand it if the macros were inlined functions? I hope
> your dont mean that the code should be repeated instead of putting the
> code in a function.
>> that is one exmple why not use marco. I are ageinst marco when it been
>> using
>> to hide
>> complex code that are bit ugly when it using goto.  I am using goto some
>> time in my code
>> as last resures. And hide complex code that contain goto is even worse
>> in my eys and try understand what the hell is going on alot harders to
>> figout when u are using marco
>> with complex code.
> The list macros doesnt use goto. The list macros hide a for() loop (as
> you can tell by the "for" in its name: LIST_FOR_EACH).
> There are good/bad examples of any code, macros or not. Just because
> macros can (easily?) be abused and have been abused doesnt mean we
> should never use them. To me it seems like macros is used as a
> punchingball when someone stumble upon code that is hard to understand.
> I probably dont understand more than 5% of the code in Reactos, but i
> dont blame macros for it. Used with care, macros are powerfull tools.
> G.
> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev at reactos.com
> http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

This thread wasn't intended for discussion. Either vote yes or no.
Please use the existing threads for discussions.

- Thomas

More information about the Ros-dev mailing list