Re: [PATCH v2] clarify usage expectations for cnt32_to_63()

Steven Rostedt
2008-11-10T23:38:44Z

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:15:32 -0500 (EST)
> Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > This references its second argument twice, which can cause correctness
> > > or efficiency problems.
> > >
> > > There is no reason that this had to be implemented in cpp.
> > > Implementing it in C will fix the above problem.
> >
> > No, it won't, for correctness and efficiency reasons.
> >
> > And I've explained why already.
>
> I'd be very surprised if you've really found a case where a macro is
> faster than an inlined function. I don't think that has happened
> before.

But that's the way my Grandpa did it. With macros!

-- Steve