From xemacs-m  Thu Mar 13 04:43:03 1997
Received: from frege.math.ethz.ch (root@frege-d-math-north-g-west.math.ethz.ch [129.132.145.3])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id EAA20932
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Thu, 13 Mar 1997 04:43:00 -0600 (CST)
Received: from fresnel.math.ethz.ch (vroonhof@fresnel [129.132.145.6]) by frege.math.ethz.ch (8.6.12/Main-STAT-mailer) with ESMTP id LAA26766 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Thu, 13 Mar 1997 11:42:25 +0100
Received: (vroonhof@localhost) by fresnel.math.ethz.ch (8.6.9/D-MATH-client) id LAA27923; Thu, 13 Mar 1997 11:40:03 +0100
Sender: vroonhof@math.ethz.ch
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: RETURN_UNGCPRO
References: <QQcghe00106.199703101637@crystal.WonderWorks.COM> <199703130838.AAA00861@xemacs.eng.sun.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.105)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
From: Jan Vroonhof <vroonhof@math.ethz.ch>
Date: 13 Mar 1997 11:40:02 +0100
In-Reply-To: Martin Buchholz's message of Thu, 13 Mar 1997 00:38:11 -0800
Message-ID: <byg1y0f531.fsf@math.ethz.ch>
Lines: 16
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.25/XEmacs 19.15

Martin Buchholz <mrb@Eng.Sun.COM> writes:

> Kyle> if anyone cares about such things.  I suppose from the compiler's
> Kyle> point of view calling 'return' unconditionally inside a do-while
> Kyle> loop is a pretty dim-bulb thing to do, but how could the compiler
> Kyle> anticipate XEmacs' Creative Use of Macros?

Can somebody tell me why the contruction is this way anyway?

> #define RETURN_UNGCPRO(expr) do						\
> {									\
>   Lisp_Object ret_ungc_val = (expr);					\
>   UNGCPRO;								\
>   return ret_ungc_val;							\
> } while (0)

