Ggtcf

What's the name of the logical fallacy where a debater extends a statement far beyond the original statement to make it true?

How do you justify more code being written by following clean code practices?

Limit max CPU usage SQL SERVER with WSRM

Would a primitive species be able to learn English from reading books alone?

What the heck is gets(stdin) on site coderbyte?

Should a narrator ever describe things based on a character's view instead of facts?

What does "tick" mean in this sentence?

How do I prevent inappropriate ads from appearing in my game?

Why does a 97 / 92 key piano exist by Bösendorfer?

Check if object is null and return null

Pre-Employment Background Check With Consent For Future Checks

"Oh no!" in Latin

Why is participating in the European Parliamentary elections used as a threat?

How do I Interface a PS/2 Keyboard without Modern Techniques?

How to preserve electronics (computers, iPads and phones) for hundreds of years

What is this high flying aircraft over Pennsylvania?

El Dorado Word Puzzle II: Videogame Edition

Language involving irrational number is not a CFL

Typing CO_2 easily

Mimic lecturing on blackboard, facing audience

ContourPlot — How do I color by contour curvature?

Echo with obfuscation

Giving feedback to someone without sounding prejudiced

Unable to disable Microsoft Store in domain environment

Macro expansion issue with gcc

What is the difference between g++ and gcc?Differences in Macro ## concatenation operator between Visual-C++ and gccPreprocessor macro GCC: pasting x and x does not give a valid preprocessing tokenWhy doesn't GCC optimize a*a*a*a*a*a to (a*a*a)*(a*a*a)?c++ macro concatation not worked under gccerror: pasting “.” and “red” does not give a valid preprocessing tokenC++11 nested macro invocation?Get the values of macro expansion as understood by the compilerMacro Expansion: Argument with Commasgcc failing to expand some macros

2

In gcc, it appears that referencing the results of a macro expansion later inside that same expansion doesn't work. For example:

#define TESTMACRO(name) 
 static int name##_func(int solNo) 
 return (solNo); 
 
 static int name##Thing = 0,##name##_func,NULL,"", capInvSw##name}; 

TESTMACRO(stuff)

This results in errors like this:

test.c:7:29: error: pasting "," and "stuff" does not give a valid preprocessing token
 static int name##Thing = 0,##name##_func,NULL,"", capInvSw##name`}; 
 ^
test.c:9:1: note: in expansion of macro ‘TESTMACRO’
 TESTMACRO(stuff)

I would expect to have a function called stuff_func created and passed into stuffThing. I believe that this works in other compilers. What is the equivalent way to do this in gcc?

gcc macros

share|improve this question

edited Mar 7 at 22:14

MikeLatiolais

asked Mar 7 at 21:44

MikeLatiolaisMikeLatiolais

112

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  What does your pre-processor output present for the expansion?
  
  – nico
  Mar 7 at 22:19
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Looks like you have a spurious extra ## in the macro body, which is what the error message is complaining about...
  
  – Chris Dodd
  Mar 8 at 0:28
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

2

In gcc, it appears that referencing the results of a macro expansion later inside that same expansion doesn't work. For example:

#define TESTMACRO(name) 
 static int name##_func(int solNo) 
 return (solNo); 
 
 static int name##Thing = 0,##name##_func,NULL,"", capInvSw##name}; 

TESTMACRO(stuff)

This results in errors like this:

test.c:7:29: error: pasting "," and "stuff" does not give a valid preprocessing token
 static int name##Thing = 0,##name##_func,NULL,"", capInvSw##name`}; 
 ^
test.c:9:1: note: in expansion of macro ‘TESTMACRO’
 TESTMACRO(stuff)

I would expect to have a function called stuff_func created and passed into stuffThing. I believe that this works in other compilers. What is the equivalent way to do this in gcc?

gcc macros

share|improve this question

edited Mar 7 at 22:14

MikeLatiolais

asked Mar 7 at 21:44

MikeLatiolaisMikeLatiolais

112

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  What does your pre-processor output present for the expansion?
  
  – nico
  Mar 7 at 22:19
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Looks like you have a spurious extra ## in the macro body, which is what the error message is complaining about...
  
  – Chris Dodd
  Mar 8 at 0:28
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

In gcc, it appears that referencing the results of a macro expansion later inside that same expansion doesn't work. For example:

#define TESTMACRO(name) 
 static int name##_func(int solNo) 
 return (solNo); 
 
 static int name##Thing = 0,##name##_func,NULL,"", capInvSw##name}; 

TESTMACRO(stuff)

This results in errors like this:

test.c:7:29: error: pasting "," and "stuff" does not give a valid preprocessing token
 static int name##Thing = 0,##name##_func,NULL,"", capInvSw##name`}; 
 ^
test.c:9:1: note: in expansion of macro ‘TESTMACRO’
 TESTMACRO(stuff)

I would expect to have a function called stuff_func created and passed into stuffThing. I believe that this works in other compilers. What is the equivalent way to do this in gcc?

gcc macros

share|improve this question

edited Mar 7 at 22:14

MikeLatiolais

asked Mar 7 at 21:44

MikeLatiolaisMikeLatiolais

112

#define TESTMACRO(name) 
 static int name##_func(int solNo) 
 return (solNo); 
 
 static int name##Thing = 0,##name##_func,NULL,"", capInvSw##name}; 

TESTMACRO(stuff)

test.c:7:29: error: pasting "," and "stuff" does not give a valid preprocessing token
 static int name##Thing = 0,##name##_func,NULL,"", capInvSw##name`}; 
 ^
test.c:9:1: note: in expansion of macro ‘TESTMACRO’
 TESTMACRO(stuff)

share|improve this question

edited Mar 7 at 22:14

MikeLatiolais

asked Mar 7 at 21:44

MikeLatiolaisMikeLatiolais

112

share|improve this question

edited Mar 7 at 22:14

MikeLatiolais

asked Mar 7 at 21:44

MikeLatiolaisMikeLatiolais

112

asked Mar 7 at 21:44

MikeLatiolaisMikeLatiolais

112

asked Mar 7 at 21:44

MikeLatiolaisMikeLatiolais

112

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

1

You can try to run only the pre-processor on your code by passing the -E flag:

gcc -E foo.c

Which evaluates your macro to:

static int stuff_func(int solNo) return (solNo); static int stuffThing = 0,stuff_func,NULL,"", capInvSwstuff`};

That can be expanded for readability to:

static int stuff_func(int solNo) 
return (solNo); 
 

static int stuffThing = 0,stuff_func,NULL,"", capInvSwstuff`};

And it appears that you have one extra/missing brackets } in your expanded macro.

Hope it helps.

share|improve this answer

answered Mar 7 at 22:13

niconico

322217

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Ah, yes, this was an artificial example meant to strip some ambiguity from a real life pinmame issue.
  
  – MikeLatiolais
  Mar 7 at 22:16
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
StackExchange.snippets.init();
);
);
, "code-snippets");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55053278%2fmacro-expansion-issue-with-gcc%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

1

You can try to run only the pre-processor on your code by passing the -E flag:

gcc -E foo.c

Which evaluates your macro to:

static int stuff_func(int solNo) return (solNo); static int stuffThing = 0,stuff_func,NULL,"", capInvSwstuff`};

That can be expanded for readability to:

static int stuff_func(int solNo) 
return (solNo); 
 

static int stuffThing = 0,stuff_func,NULL,"", capInvSwstuff`};

And it appears that you have one extra/missing brackets } in your expanded macro.

Hope it helps.

share|improve this answer

answered Mar 7 at 22:13

niconico

322217

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Ah, yes, this was an artificial example meant to strip some ambiguity from a real life pinmame issue.
  
  – MikeLatiolais
  Mar 7 at 22:16
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

1

You can try to run only the pre-processor on your code by passing the -E flag:

gcc -E foo.c

Which evaluates your macro to:

static int stuff_func(int solNo) return (solNo); static int stuffThing = 0,stuff_func,NULL,"", capInvSwstuff`};

That can be expanded for readability to:

static int stuff_func(int solNo) 
return (solNo); 
 

static int stuffThing = 0,stuff_func,NULL,"", capInvSwstuff`};

And it appears that you have one extra/missing brackets } in your expanded macro.

Hope it helps.

share|improve this answer

answered Mar 7 at 22:13

niconico

322217

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Ah, yes, this was an artificial example meant to strip some ambiguity from a real life pinmame issue.
  
  – MikeLatiolais
  Mar 7 at 22:16
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

You can try to run only the pre-processor on your code by passing the -E flag:

gcc -E foo.c

Which evaluates your macro to:

static int stuff_func(int solNo) return (solNo); static int stuffThing = 0,stuff_func,NULL,"", capInvSwstuff`};

That can be expanded for readability to:

static int stuff_func(int solNo) 
return (solNo); 
 

static int stuffThing = 0,stuff_func,NULL,"", capInvSwstuff`};

And it appears that you have one extra/missing brackets } in your expanded macro.

Hope it helps.

share|improve this answer

answered Mar 7 at 22:13

niconico

322217

gcc -E foo.c

static int stuff_func(int solNo) return (solNo); static int stuffThing = 0,stuff_func,NULL,"", capInvSwstuff`};

static int stuff_func(int solNo) 
return (solNo); 
 

static int stuffThing = 0,stuff_func,NULL,"", capInvSwstuff`};

share|improve this answer

answered Mar 7 at 22:13

niconico

322217

answered Mar 7 at 22:13

niconico

322217

answered Mar 7 at 22:13

niconico

322217