Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!seismo!mcnc!philabs!micomvax!musocs!mcgill-vision!mouse
From: mouse@mcgill-vision.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: fabs(x) vs. (x) < 0 ? -(x) : (x)
Message-ID: <642@mcgill-vision.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 10-Feb-87 03:33:41 EST
Article-I.D.: mcgill-v.642
Posted: Tue Feb 10 03:33:41 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 12-Feb-87 04:04:35 EST
References: <4943@mimsy.UUCP> <2550005@hpisod2.HP> <756@unc.unc.UUCP>
Organization: McGill University, Montreal
Lines: 31

In article <756@unc.unc.UUCP>, steele@unc.UUCP (Oliver Steele) writes:
> In article <2550005@hpisod2.HP> decot@hpisod2.HP (Dave Decot) writes:
>>    #define fabs(X)     ((_fabs = (X)), (_fabs < 0? -_fabs : _fabs))
> Beware
> 	fabs(a,fabs(b,c)),
> as well as
> 	fabs(a,func(b,c))
> where func is a macro which invokes fabs.

fabs(a,fabs(b,c)) ->
((_fabs=(a,((_fabs=(b,c)),(_fabs<0?-_fabs:_fabs)))),(_fabs<0?-_fabs:_fabs))

which looks reliable to me (outer assignment doesn't happen until the
inner expression is done).  Problem arises with fabs(a)<fabs(b) and
similar expressions.

However, if fabs is a macro as above, fabs(a,b) will do something very
different from what it would if fabs were a function.  If fabs is a
function, "a,b" is treated as two arguments; the macro treats a,b as a
comma expression instead of two arguments!  Most compilers will
probably ignore extra arguments to functions, meaning that fabs(a,b)
returns fabs(a) if it's a function and fabs(b) if it's a macro...hmmm,
maybe this could be useful (ok, ok, quit shuddering, I *know* it's
nonportable!).

					der Mouse

USA: {ihnp4,decvax,akgua,utzoo,etc}!utcsri!mcgill-vision!mouse
     think!mosart!mcgill-vision!mouse
Europe: mcvax!decvax!utcsri!mcgill-vision!mouse
ARPAnet: think!mosart!mcgill-vision!mouse@harvard.harvard.edu