Tim Ruehsen <[email protected]> writes: > The HL and LDUP macros were really ugly and in very most cases not even > needed.
They're intended as a kind of "mini-language" for the tests. I have earlier (in the lsh project, years ago) tried using m4 for the same purpose, but in the end I concluded that it was overal less trouble to just use the C preprocessor. What in particular do you find ugly? That they expand to two arguments? Short cryptic names? Something else? Wold you like them better if they expanded to some constructor calls for proper string objects olding both length and data, which were then passed to the various test helper functions? I don't care very much about the implementation of the mini-language. > But if you insist in keeping the H, HL, LDUP macros, I have to cancel my > offer, sorry. I'll do that myself then. Regards, /Niels -- Niels Möller. PGP-encrypted email is preferred. Keyid C0B98E26. Internet email is subject to wholesale government surveillance. _______________________________________________ nettle-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lysator.liu.se/mailman/listinfo/nettle-bugs
