Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!taumet!steve
From: steve@taumet.com (Stephen Clamage)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: #defines....
Message-ID: <308@taumet.com>
Date: 7 Jul 90 23:00:39 GMT
References: <9007062136.AA08003@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Reply-To: steve@taumet.UUCP (Stephen Clamage)
Organization: Taumetric Corporation, San Diego
Lines: 17

In article <9007062136.AA08003@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> jlol@altar.ee.byu.edu writes:
>What about something like this?
>
>#define QUIT(err) { do_some_cleanup_stuff(); return(err); }

We've now seen a lot of stuff on this thread where someone shows a
macro which cannot be *precisely* duplicated with consts and inline
functions.

IMHO, the point is not to duplicate *precisely* what can be
done with macros, but to write clear, concise, efficient code --
code which can be understood and maintained easily.  So I must
ask whether these macro examples fit these criteria better than
other C++ language mechanisms.
-- 

Steve Clamage, TauMetric Corp, steve@taumet.com