Re: [PATCH 2/7] ios: Pass offset to low-level macros.

[Egeyar Bagcioglu]

I have just sent the following to only Eric and not to the mailing list 
by mistake.

Regards
Egeyar

On 2/29/20 4:22 PM, Egeyar Bagcioglu wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> > > +++ b/src/ios.c
> > > @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@
> > >
> > >   #define STREQ(a, b) (strcmp (a, b) == 0)
> > >
> > > -#define IOS_GET_C_ERR_CHCK(c, io)               \
> > > +#define IOS_GET_C_ERR_CHCK(c, io, off)        \
> > >     {                                             \
> > >     int ret = io->dev_if->get_c ((io)->dev);     \
> >
> > Just noticing: We're inconsistent on whether the 'io' argument to 
> > this macro is allowed to be an arbitrary expression. Fortunately, 
> > none of the callers pass a complex expression, but the correct 
> > spelling for arbitrary syntax would be:
> >
> > int ret = (io)->dev_if->get_c ((io)->dev); \
> >
> > yet that still would result in multiple side effects; so even more 
> > reusable would be:
> >
> > ios io_ = (io); \
> > int ret = io_->dev_if->get_c (io_->dev); \
> >
> > Or, we can declare that this macro is not intended to be reusable 
> > outside this file, and could spell it:
> >
> > int ret = io->dev_if->get_c (io->dev); \
> >
> > or go one step further and declare that it is only to be run inside a 
> > function where 'io' is already in scope, and not pass in an io 
> > argument to the macro.
>
> I'd go with this one if I wanted to fix that. But really, they all 
> seem fine to me. Your call.
>
> > I don't have any strong preferences, but am happy to tweak this and 
> > subsequent patches to match any style that someone expresses a 
> > preference for.
>
> Thanks
> Egeyar