Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 7927519
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 3, 20262026-06-03T19:20:30+00:00 2026-06-03T19:20:30+00:00

Consider this code: #define N_ 0 #define N_X 1 #define M(a) N_ M(arg)X; //

  • 0

Consider this code:

#define N_ 0
#define N_X 1
#define M(a) N_

M(arg)X;    //  #1 -- I'd like this to expand to N_X, and ultimately 1; but it's 0X instead
M(arg);     //  #2 -- this should and does expand to 0

The problem with #1 is that after expanding M(), the result contains N_, and before concatenating it with X, the preprocessor finds and expands it.
Can I somehow delay this re-scanning of the result for further macros, such that the preprocessor finds N_X instead of N_?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-03T19:20:32+00:00Added an answer on June 3, 2026 at 7:20 pm

    First there is a different between N_ X and N_X. The first are two tokens. To form one token you have to use the token pasting operator ##, but this operator inhibits macro expansion, so this:

    M(a) ## X //Compiler error can't paste ')' and X
    

    Causes a compile error, because its trying to paste M(a) and not N_. You can allow for macros to expand before pasting by using an extra level of macros(this is really commonly used macro):

    #define PRIMITIVE_CAT(x, y) x ## y
    #define CAT(x, y) PRIMITIVE_CAT(x, y)
    

    However, in your case, this still won’t work:

     CAT(M(a), X) //expands to 0
    

    That is because, you are using object macros, rather than function macros. If you change it to function macros, it will work how you want:

    #define N_() 0
    #define N_X() 1
    #define M(a) N_
    
    CAT(M(arg), X)() // expands to 1
    M(arg)()     //  expands to 0
    

    Function macros are more powerful and you can delay the expansion of them. Here’s how you can delay them for one scan:

    #define EMPTY()
    #define DEFER(x) x EMPTY()
    
    N_() //Expands to 0
    DEFER(N_)() //Expands N_ ()
    

    Delaying macro expansion like this is one of the ways recursion can be implemented in the preprocessor.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Consider this code; #define A 5 #define B 3 int difference = A -
Consider this code: #include <stdio.h> #define N 5 void printMatrix(int (*matrix)[N],int n) { int
Consider this (horrible, terrible, no good, very bad) code structure: #define foo(x) // commented
Let's consider a code example like this (it is just an artificial example to
Consider this code: new Ajax.Request('?service=example', { parameters : {tags : 'exceptions'}, onSuccess : this.dataReceived.bind(this)
Consider this code: public <T> List<T> meth(List<?> type) { System.out.println(type); // 1 return new
Consider this code: import socket store = [] scount = 0 while True: scount+=1
Consider this code: int main() { int e; prn(e); return 0; } void prn(double
Consider this code: void res(int a,int n) { printf(%d %d, ,a,n); } void main(void)
Consider this code: int x = 17; int y = 013; System.out.println(x+y = +

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.