From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yoann Padioleau Subject: Re: source code transform Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 11:06:00 -0600 Message-ID: <87k594quiv.fsf@aryx.cs.uiuc.edu> References: <1231354996.3545.80.camel@johannes> <87skntqs5e.fsf@aryx.cs.uiuc.edu> <1231461536.5715.31.camel@brick> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from expredir4.cites.uiuc.edu ([128.174.5.187]:50501 "EHLO expredir4.cites.uiuc.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752260AbZAIRKU (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:10:20 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1231461536.5715.31.camel@brick> (Harvey Harrison's message of "Thu\, 08 Jan 2009 16\:38\:56 -0800") Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: Harvey Harrison Cc: Yoann Padioleau , Johannes Berg , mosfet , linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org Harvey Harrison writes: > On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 17:45 -0600, Yoann Padioleau wrote: >> Johannes Berg writes: > >> @@ >> identifier f; >> @@ >> >> f(...) >> { >> + fprintf(stderr, "%s: %s()\n", __FILE__, __FUNCTION__); >> ... >> } >> > > Personal pet-peeve, use __func__, not __FUNCTION__. > > __func__ is C, __FUNCTION__ is a gcc-extension. Ok. Is there also a __file__, and __line__ ? If this not the case then I would rather keep my __FUNCTION__, it's estetically more consistent. > > Cheers, > > Harvey