Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: The new macro M is no good...

2005-07-27 Thread Matthew Gregan
At 2005-07-27T14:57:48-0700, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > Of course, we don't compile on VC++ at all ATM, so I'm not sure how > problematic this is :-). And if or when we do, it's likely to be VC++ 7.1 upwards--the surgery required to work with VC++ 6.0 would probably be quite ugly. VC++ 6.0 is offic

Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: The new macro M is no good...

2005-07-27 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 08:28:28AM -0500, Brian Downing wrote: > Traditionally Visual C++ (6 at least) has had __LINE__ not expand into a > literal number when the "Fix and Continue" debugging option is on. This > is so all the __LINE__ references can be kept up to date as the code > changes. Yes

Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: The new macro M is no good...

2005-07-27 Thread Brian Downing
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 06:40:09PM -0700, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > So we have something like > void invert_changeset(change_set const & cs, change_set & inverted) > { >M(cs); >M(inverted); >// code goes here > } > very low impact, easy to convince people to sprinkle around, etc. > Wh

Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: The new macro M is no good...

2005-07-26 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 10:40:53PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Nathaniel Smith: > > > Well, yes, it's good advice. But since M _cannot_ be a non-macro, > > What is it doing, actually? Maybe there's a completely different way > to get things done. It marks a variable as "being of interest"

Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: The new macro M is no good...

2005-07-26 Thread Florian Weimer
* Nathaniel Smith: > Well, yes, it's good advice. But since M _cannot_ be a non-macro, What is it doing, actually? Maybe there's a completely different way to get things done. ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.no

Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: The new macro M is no good...

2005-07-25 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 11:33:49AM -0700, Steven E. Harris wrote: > Funny, just last night I read Item 0 in /C++ Coding Standards/ by > Sutter and Alexandrescu?: > > [A]lways use ONLY_UPPERCASE_NAMES for macros and never think about > writing a macro that is a common word or abbreviation (incl

[Monotone-devel] Re: The new macro M is no good...

2005-07-25 Thread Steven E. Harris
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Personally, I find it pretty damn lame to use a public symbol like M > in a public (i.e. library) header file. There's just too much > chance someone else will us such a symbol... But I guess the C++ > community likes to forget there a