Re: [RFC]: (void)0 instead of empty defines

on 15/06/2009 22:38 Marcel Moolenaar said the following:
> If the patch is all we need to compile the kernel with the warning
> enabled and knowing that the warning has already found real bugs,
> then it's a no-brainer to me: commit.

I agree - if FOO is a function-like or complete-statement-like macro than it is
more consistent to expand it to no-op statement than to nothing. (I am not sure if
 the same is true for other type of macros, e.g. expression-like ones).

BTW, I think that this is a very typical practice, many C projects that I worked
on used this convention. Our assert.h also does this.

-- 
Andriy Gapon