Closed andrei-sandor closed 1 day ago
@hjmjohnson is this pattern fine, or do you even want a superfluous static_assert
in this kind of case? We'd like to be sure what you'll accept before repeating the pattern.
OK, so as this is fine, we will update this PR to apply the same pattern...
@hjmjohnson We have committed new changes. However, we would like to know if we can proceed with adding ITK_MACROEND_NOOP_STATEMENT to macros like itkBooleanMacro. I know that in the old PR, you mention that it is not needed, but we saw some cases where the NOOP statement is not used.
@hjmjohnson We have committed new changes. However, we would like to know if we can proceed with adding ITK_MACROEND_NOOP_STATEMENT to macros like itkBooleanMacro. I know that in the old PR, you mention that it is not needed, but we saw some cases where the NOOP statement is not used.
Please do use the ITK_MACROEND_NOOP_STATEMENT
at the end of
itkBooleanMacro
itkGPUKernelMacro
itkForLoopAssignmentMacro
itkForLoopRoundingAndAssignmentMacro
and others that would otherwise complain about unnecessary ';'
Thank you!
@andrei-sandor @seanm Is this ready for review?
@andrei-sandor @seanm Is this ready for review?
It is ready for merge in our opinion. There are still more -Wextra-semi
to fix, but may as well get this next tranche in.
Would be nice to merge this, so that it doesn't conflict again...
Decided to remove semicolon from struct and not from where the function-like macro is used. Is this a fix that is acceptable? Can we proceed with similar fixes?