Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!ucla-cs!zen!ucbvax!hplabs!sdcrdcf!csun!aeusemrs
From: aeusemrs@csun.UUCP (News Manager)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: C blocks
Message-ID: <970@csun.UUCP>
Date: 17 Dec 87 07:40:20 GMT
References: <470@PT.CS.CMU.EDU> <1966@chinet.UUCP>
Reply-To: aeusemrs@csun.UUCP (Mike Stump)
Organization: California State University, Northridge
Lines: 18

In article <470@PT.CS.CMU.EDU> edw@IUS1.CS.CMU.EDU (Eddie Wyatt) writes:
>Could the ANSI committee consider adding return values for blocks?
>If they where added, I could guarentee my macro arguments where only
>evaluated once as they are in function calls.

Ah, yes, the joys of gcc:

#define max(a, b) ({int _a=(a), _b=(b); _a > _b ? _a : _b; })

Nice, I think they missed something though because they do not appear to
want the more general form:

#define max(a, b) ({int _a=(a), _b=(b); return _a > _b ? _a : _b; })

Live and Learn...
-- 
Mike Stump, Cal State Univ, Northridge Comp Sci Department
uucp: {sdcrdcf, ihnp4, hplabs, ttidca, psivax, csustan}!csun!aeusemrs