On 29 Aug 2001 08:48:29 +0200, Chemolli Francesco (USI) wrote:
> > Looks fine except that it is missing a set of paranteses
> > around LEVEL. May be
> > required in case LEVEL is an expression.
>
> It doesn't appear to be the case right now, or it wouldn't compile I think.
> That patch is suboptimal in such a case though, because if the
> test is not constant it won't be optimzied away, and thus it would
> be worse than it is now.
> The attached patch on the other hand should be fine in the same scenario.
>
> --
> /kinkie
>
Your previous patch would have been fine with just adding the (),
because it would only not optimise away for those specific debug() calls
- which won't optimise away no matter what :}.
Rob
Received on Wed Aug 29 2001 - 00:47:21 MDT
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:14:16 MST