-
Welcome to the E-Goat :: The Totally Unofficial RAF Rumour Network.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Macro vs Sub?
- Thread starter Shugster
- Start date
A
Albert Park
Guest
Thanks for that. I could have gone to a number of better forums but wanted to get the grey matter stirring in other geeks... er I mean others interested in programming...
So, I'll stick with my subs, macros make life easier but take more space, (and therefore more time to execute), and as that's the lazy / easy approach I'll leave it.
A microsecond wasted is time I could have spent doing something else!
DT_Xtremez_15:
So, I'll stick with my subs, macros make life easier but take more space, (and therefore more time to execute), and as that's the lazy / easy approach I'll leave it.
A microsecond wasted is time I could have spent doing something else!
DT_Xtremez_15:
- 1,966
- 13
- 38
You cant avoid using macros in C and C++. #include. #define, conditional compilation guards etc but their use should be limited as much as is possible. Macros ignore scope, types. Compilers have great difficulty in trapping compile-time errors that would otherwise be found in a subroutine. When they do go wrong they are a pig to debug. They can use memory in unexpected ways (and silently!) and wont be optimised by the compiler.
The syntax of macros is peculiar and not intuitive for more complex tasks...I know this because of a rather large part of my last project had a big smelly macro in it, designed by yours truly. This was accepted since we were suffering more problems with the original method.
If you remember one thing, remember, macros are bad.
As an aside, the original implementation of Microsoft MFC is full of macros. This means applications on your desktop depend on macros to execute, even though they are the work of the devil.
If youre talking about micro-controllers and assembly, thats another subject entirely. If youre working with a high-level language, especially if you are doing it professionally, avoid like the plague.
As you know I play with Microcontrollers.
I had to recompile somone elses code yesterday and Macros were included in the assembler code... Not only that, the old code was over ten years old and the new Microchip assembler flagged up case sensitive errors etc... over 300 in all!DT_Xtremez_35:
I got there in the end.DT_Xtremez_19:
Strange to have a job that you love / hate equally!DT_Xtremez_15:
I had to recompile somone elses code yesterday and Macros were included in the assembler code... Not only that, the old code was over ten years old and the new Microchip assembler flagged up case sensitive errors etc... over 300 in all!
DT_Xtremez_35:I got there in the end.
DT_Xtremez_19:Strange to have a job that you love / hate equally!
DT_Xtremez_15: