Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Fix rescanning when a macro expansion result forms a new function-like macro call - #682
Merged
Merged
Conversation
pfultz2
commented
Jul 15, 2026
ContributorAuthor
pfultz2
commented
Jul 22, 2026
ContributorAuthor
@danmar Are you able to review? |
danmar
approved these changes
Jul 24, 2026
danmar
commented
Jul 24, 2026
Collaborator
I hope this might fix some existing issue i.e. #549 |
pfultz2
commented
Jul 29, 2026
ContributorAuthor
@danmar Can this be merged now? |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
danmar
commented
Aug 4, 2026
Collaborator
This did not solve #549 unfortunately :-( |
pfultz2
commented
Aug 5, 2026
ContributorAuthor
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When the result of a macro expansion ends with the name of a function-like
macro and the tokens that follow supply its arguments, simplecpp performed
that rescan only once instead of repeatedly. Given:
g(i)expanded toi ( ) i ( )instead of nothing: insideh's bodyd()(, e)(),d()was correctly rescanned asa(, i)yieldingi, but theresulting
iwas never rescanned against the trailing().The rescan logic was also missing logic to prevent re-expanding the same macro name: so
#define f() f+f()()gavefinstead off().