From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-prs-return-29733-listarch-gcc-prs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 10225 invoked by alias); 20 Feb 2003 06:56:02 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-prs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 10177 invoked by uid 71); 20 Feb 2003 06:56:01 -0000
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 06:56:00 -0000
Message-ID: <20030220065601.10175.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
From: Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.co.uk>
Subject: Re: preprocessor/9764: Varargs macro extension incorrectly expands if the varargs argument is the macro itself
Reply-To: Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.co.uk>
X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00970.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-prs.sourceware.org>

The following reply was made to PR preprocessor/9764; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.co.uk>
To: Ryan Mallon <rpm31@student.canterbury.ac.nz>
Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: preprocessor/9764: Varargs macro extension incorrectly expands if the varargs argument is the macro itself
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 06:49:17 +0000

 Ryan Mallon wrote:-
 
 > #define func(a, varargs...) _func(a, ##varargs)
 > 
 > The problems occurs when the macro name itself is used in the varargs 
 > part: e.g
 > 
 > func(a, func(b, c));
 > 
 > Incorrectly expands to:
 > 
 > _func(a, func(b, c));
 > 
 > Without the token paste opperator in the defintion it works as expected, 
 > but then I cannot have varargs=0. Im working with a large amount of 
 > existing code, so I cannot alter the actual calls on the macro definition.
 
 What makes you think it's incorrect?
 
 Neil.