On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 12:38:33PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > > - do { * (unsigned long *) &mips_io_port_base = (base); } while (0)
> > > + *(unsigned long *)&mips_io_port_base = (base);
> >
> > Now consider someone writing
> >
> > if (...)
> > set_io_port_base(...);
> > else
> > ...
> >
> > And see what happens...
>
> If Bradley loses the extra semicolon, what other problem is the
> do/while construct supposed to address? I seem to recall there being
> another problem case, but I can't remember what it is.
There is imho not very much sense in such a macro / function being written
in a way that returns any value, that is something like
foo = set_io_port_base(...)
doesn't make obvious sense. So it's written in a way which will take care
of any attempt to use the return type.
Ralf
