Zeitpunkt Nutzer Delta Tröts TNR Titel Version maxTL So 14.07.2024 00:00:00 61.950 +2 3.542.390 57,2 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 Sa 13.07.2024 00:00:08 61.948 +1 3.539.632 57,1 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 Fr 12.07.2024 00:01:45 61.947 +6 3.537.376 57,1 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 Do 11.07.2024 00:00:37 61.941 +12 3.533.951 57,1 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 Mi 10.07.2024 00:00:53 61.929 +5 3.530.507 57,0 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 Di 09.07.2024 00:00:08 61.924 +2 3.527.175 57,0 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 Mo 08.07.2024 00:00:19 61.922 +5 3.524.369 56,9 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 So 07.07.2024 00:00:04 61.917 0 3.522.885 56,9 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 Sa 06.07.2024 00:00:07 61.917 -2 3.523.632 56,9 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 Fr 05.07.2024 00:00:27 61.919 0 3.520.710 56,9 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500
Paul Evans (@leonerd) · 11/2022 · Tröts: 1.221 · Folger: 411
So 14.07.2024 22:50
In a #C function, empty statements are valid. So it's allowable to have a macro that expands to simply `;` if it shouldn't do anything. Are there equivalent things for struct members and initialisers?
I want a macro that puts extra information into structs for debug purposes, but if debugging is disabled it should do nothing. That means the macro will be empty. But what empty thing can I put in the struct so the macro can still be followed by a semicolon or comma..?
[Öffentlich] Antw.: 0 Wtrl.: 0 Fav.: 0