Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!crdgw1!underdog!volpe
From: volpe@underdog.crd.ge.com (Christopher R Volpe)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Using Macros
Message-ID: <10881@crdgw1.crd.ge.com>
Date: 9 Aug 90 12:15:42 GMT
References: <362.26be9dcc@astro.pc.ab.com> <21057@grebyn.com> <642@travis.csd.harris.com> <17298@haddock.ima.isc.com> <46860@brunix.UUCP>
Sender: news@crdgw1.crd.ge.com
Reply-To: volpe@underdog.crd.ge.com (Christopher R Volpe)
Lines: 17

In article <46860@brunix.UUCP>, gvr@cs.brown.edu (George V. Reilly) writes:
|>Ah, but Karl, you missed the more important bug that Brad should have
|>used &&, not ||.  In Brad's example, exit() will only be called if
|>cond == 0, which is exactly the inverse of what is desired.  The same is
|>true of your second offering.

What makes you think that is what was desired? I interpret "CHECK(cond)"
the same way I interpret "ASSERT(cond)", which is "continue iff cond is true".
I.e., exit when cond is false. Under this interpretation, "||" is correct.

|>________________
|>George V. Reilly			gvr@cs.brown.edu
|>uunet!brunix!gvr   gvr@browncs.bitnet	Box 1910, Brown U, Prov, RI 02912
                        
Chris Volpe
G.E. Corporate R&D
volpecr@crd.ge.com