tired of typing same line over and over again....

Hello!

I am using the lines:

printf("\n\n");
system("cls");
system("pause");

alot when im coding me school projects and i was wondering if its possible to make like alias to those lines.... It would be sweet if i could write:

line
cls
pause

instead of repeating the same lines over and over again....

Tyvm!

You could write a function.

bha hahah yes OFC!!!!

tyvm for help hehe!

Or a macro.


Quzah.

Originally Posted by ingenting

Hello!

I am using the lines:

printf("\n\n");
system("cls");
system("pause");

alot when im coding me school projects and i was wondering if its possible to make like alias to those lines.... It would be sweet if i could write:

line
cls
pause

instead of repeating the same lines over and over again....

Tyvm!

Code:

#include <stdio.h>

#define pause system("pause")

int main()
{
pause;
pause;
pause;
return 0;
}

or if you really want to not have a bunch of defines in the top of your source you can make another file and include it.

Code:

//personalize.h

#define line printf("\n\n")
#define cls system("cls")
#define pause system("pause")

then do:

Code:

#include <stdio.h>
#include "personalize.h"

int main()
{
pause;
pause;
pause;
line;
cls;
return 0;
}

Typically, you don't #include .c files. You #include header files.


Quzah.

Originally Posted by quzah

Typically, you don't #include .c files. You #include header files.


Quzah.

(opps) was typing it fast(opps)

Those macros seems nice!

Tyvm for help guys!

Originally Posted by ingenting

Those macros seems nice!

If you do want to use them, use fully capitalised names instead, as is the convention for macros.

I personally prefer functions over macros every time. In this case, the functions are relatively simple, so the compiler may inline them, so there is no overhead. And there are no variables involved, so there's no benefit from that perspective on using macros.

--
Mats

...so there is no overhead...

Overhead in pausing a program? Besides, system("pause") itself seems to have quite a lot of overhead, not that you'd care too much.

Originally Posted by anon

Overhead in pausing a program? Besides, system("pause") itself seems to have quite a lot of overhead, not that you'd care too much.

I actually meant overhead in code-size, rather than in execution time - sure, hitting a key for "pause" will eat a lot of CPU and time both.

--
Mats

He means there's no overhead in the actual call to the function. ie:

Code:

#define BLAH ...

void blah( void )
{
    ...pause...
    ...printstuff...
}

The overhead in calling function 'blah' instead of using macro BLAH. Not the overhead with system( "pause" ).

[edit] Beaten to it. [/edit]

Quzah.

Let's see... printf() ends up hitting the operating system, which scrolls a terminal line buffer, which results in probably several hundred thousand pixels being redrawn. Then a call to system, which involves creating a process. Then another call to system to create a pause...

Somehow, I don't think function call overhead is a consideration here.

Originally Posted by brewbuck

Let's see... printf() ends up hitting the operating system, which scrolls a terminal line buffer, which results in probably several hundred thousand pixels being redrawn. Then a call to system, which involves creating a process. Then another call to system to create a pause...

Somehow, I don't think function call overhead is a consideration here.

Indeed. If it's used OFTEN, it creates bigger code (but most likely, the overall code is small enough that it doesn't matter ANYWAYS). [And of course, calling printf instead of a simple function may actually create MORE code - so that's an argument for NOT using macros].