Why do a lot of #defines in the kernel use do { ... } while(0)?

转载http://blog.csdn.net/chenhu_doc/article/details/856468

There are a couple of reasons:

(from Dave Miller) Empty statements give a warning from the compiler so this is why you see #define FOO do { } while(0).

(from Dave Miller) It gives you a basic block in which to declare local variables.

(from Ben Collins) It allows you to use more complex macros in conditional code. Imagine a macro of several lines of code like:

#define FOO(x) /printf("arg is %s/n", x); /do_something_useful(x);

Now imagine using it like:

if (blah == 2)FOO(blah);

This interprets to:

if (blah == 2)printf("arg is %s/n", blah);do_something_useful(blah);;

As you can see, the if then only encompasses the printf(), and the do_something_useful() call is unconditional (not within the scope of the if), like you wanted it. So, by using a block like do { ... } while(0), you would get this:

if (blah == 2)do {printf("arg is %s/n", blah);do_something_useful(blah);} while (0);

Which is exactly what you want.

(from Per Persson) As both Miller and Collins point out, you want a block statement so you can have several lines of code and declare local variables. But then the natural thing would be to just use for example:

#define exch(x,y) { int tmp; tmp=x; x=y; y=tmp; }

However that wouldn't work in some cases. The following code is meant to be an if-statement with two branches:

if (x > y)exch(x,y); // Branch 1elsedo_something(); // Branch 2

But it would be interpreted as an if-statement with only one branch:

if (x > y) { // Single-branch if-statement!!!int tmp; // The one and only branch consiststmp = x; // of the block.x = y;y = tmp;}; // empty statementelse // ERROR!!! "parse error before else"do_something();

The problem is the semi-colon (;) coming directly after the block.The solution for this is to sandwich the block between do and while (0). Then we have a single statement with the capabilities of a block, but not considered as being a block statement by the compiler.Our if-statement now becomes:

if (x > y)do {int tmp;tmp = x;x = y;y = tmp;} while(0);elsedo_something();