Re: Concatenated if and preprocessor

Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> writes:

On 14/03/2025 16:44, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>

   for(  int just_once = 1;  just_once;  just_once = 0  ){

>
Any reason not to say ...
>
do {
    ...
} while (0);
>
... ?

In fact using do/while(0) is what I first wrote.  But then
I thought, oh wait, what if an overzealous compiler gives
a warning because the while() expression is always false? :-/

It's because of examples like this that I am wary of rules
like "enable all warnings" and "treat any warning condition
as an error."  I recently ran across a set of coding standard
rules that included these rules:  not just /some/ warning
conditions, but ALL warning conditions.  I still don't know
if they were literally serious.  (And my understanding is
clang has a -Weverything option, which enables all warning
conditions that clang is able to test for, no matter how
silly.)