# [PATCH] very small cleanup: #undef a macro that isn't used anywhere else 3 messages from 2008-11-10 to 2008-11-10. Participants: Francis Galiegue, Johannes Schindelin. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/16252 ## Francis Galiegue, 2008-11-10 18:28 Subject: [PATCH] very small cleanup: #undef a macro that isn't used anywhere else Message-ID: <200811101928.27207.fg@one2team.net> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/200811101928.27207.fg%40one2team.net ``` In xdiff-interface.c, the FIRST_FEW_BYTES macro is defined, is never used anwhere else, so we might as well undefine it after we're done with it. --- xdiff-interface.c | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/xdiff-interface.c b/xdiff-interface.c index e8ef46d..2cf30cd 100644 --- a/xdiff-interface.c +++ b/xdiff-interface.c @@ -226,6 +226,7 @@ int buffer_is_binary(const char *ptr, unsigned long size) size = FIRST_FEW_BYTES; return !!memchr(ptr, 0, size); } +#undef FIRST_FEW_BYTES struct ff_regs { int nr; -- 1.6.0.3 -- fge ``` ## Johannes Schindelin, 2008-11-10 19:09 Subject: Re: [PATCH] very small cleanup: #undef a macro that isn't used anywhere else Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/alpine.DEB.1.00.0811102008330.30769%40pacific.mpi-cbg.de In-Reply-To: <200811101928.27207.fg@one2team.net> ``` Hi, On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Francis Galiegue wrote: > In xdiff-interface.c, the FIRST_FEW_BYTES macro is defined, is never > used anwhere else, so we might as well undefine it after we're done with > it. Would not the consequence be that we end up with a ton of #undefines all over the place, reducing readability incredibly? Ciao, Dscho ``` ## Francis Galiegue, 2008-11-10 19:09 Subject: Re: [PATCH] very small cleanup: #undef a macro that isn't used anywhere else Message-ID: <200811102009.58332.fg@one2team.net> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/200811102009.58332.fg%40one2team.net In-Reply-To: ``` Le Monday 10 November 2008 20:09:21 Johannes Schindelin, vous avez écrit : > Hi, > > On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Francis Galiegue wrote: > > In xdiff-interface.c, the FIRST_FEW_BYTES macro is defined, is never > > used anwhere else, so we might as well undefine it after we're done with > > it. > > Would not the consequence be that we end up with a ton of #undefines all > over the place, reducing readability incredibly? > Hmwell, this is a twofold argument, I guess... * for: the macro is defined, not undefined: it means that potentially, it can be used somewhere else in the file; but it isn't (in this case); * against: macros defined in a C file only ever have scope in said file (unless so mischievous Makefile cats two C files together before compile and file order is important -- but git doesn't do that), so why #undefine anything? Personally, I'm with the first argument. YMMV, of course. -- fge ```