W3cubDocs

/GCC 7 CPP

3.10.3 Swallowing the Semicolon

Often it is desirable to define a macro that expands into a compound statement. Consider, for example, the following macro, that advances a pointer (the argument p says where to find it) across whitespace characters:

#define SKIP_SPACES(p, limit)  \
{ char *lim = (limit);         \
  while (p < lim) {            \
    if (*p++ != ' ') {         \
      p--; break; }}}

Here backslash-newline is used to split the macro definition, which must be a single logical line, so that it resembles the way such code would be laid out if not part of a macro definition.

A call to this macro might be SKIP_SPACES (p, lim). Strictly speaking, the call expands to a compound statement, which is a complete statement with no need for a semicolon to end it. However, since it looks like a function call, it minimizes confusion if you can use it like a function call, writing a semicolon afterward, as in SKIP_SPACES (p, lim);

This can cause trouble before else statements, because the semicolon is actually a null statement. Suppose you write

if (*p != 0)
  SKIP_SPACES (p, lim);
else …

The presence of two statements—the compound statement and a null statement—in between the if condition and the else makes invalid C code.

The definition of the macro SKIP_SPACES can be altered to solve this problem, using a do … while statement. Here is how:

#define SKIP_SPACES(p, limit)     \
do { char *lim = (limit);         \
     while (p < lim) {            \
       if (*p++ != ' ') {         \
         p--; break; }}}          \
while (0)

Now SKIP_SPACES (p, lim); expands into

do {…} while (0);

which is one statement. The loop executes exactly once; most compilers generate no extra code for it.

Next: , Previous: , Up: Macro Pitfalls [Contents][Index]

© Free Software Foundation
Licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-7.1.0/cpp/Swallowing-the-Semicolon.html