#defines with parameters [was :Re: v05i053: A "safe" ... ]

[Piercarlo Grandi]

In article <1988Nov27.010155.29222 at utzoo.uucp> henry at utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:

    Please re-read what I said; the *definition* of a macro and an *invocation*
    of said macro are entirely different things.
    -- 
    Sendmail is a bug,          |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
    not a feature.              | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry at zoo.toronto.edu

Ok, ok! I just happened to misread, and I read *definition* in both
places; you know, when dpANS is involved my subconscious plays some
tricks, and I can believe whatever ridiculous thing it puts before my
eyes. Yes, I am prejudiced, and I am not proud of it, but I like to
have some prejudice here and there.

I can only offer one of these explanations for it:

    I had eaten too many pork scratchings.
    I had read too many ramblings on the worm debacle in tcp-ip.
    An alpha particle hit several cones in my retina.
    The random gaffe generator function of rn had hit me.
    ....

Whatever the reason, I should have paid more attention; I was really
taken away by my prejudices, and my most abject apologies for this to
all of you.

On the other hand (and in order to sidetrack an embarassing
discussion), I still don't like the introduction of signed as an
alternative to unsigned as attributes for types char,short,int,long,
instead of interpreting char,short,long as attributes of types
unsigned,int. Any reasonable reason :-) to eschew the latter solution?

(and no, I will not even mention my HATE for volatile, far, near and
the repeated attempts to get noalias in the language, which things in
my skewed mind overshadow whatever contribution dpANS has made to
clarify so many other issues).
-- 
Piercarlo "Peter" Grandi			INET: pcg at cs.aber.ac.uk
Sw.Eng. Group, Dept. of Computer Science	UUCP: ...!mcvax!ukc!aber-cs!pcg
UCW, Penglais, Aberystwyth, WALES SY23 3BZ (UK)