Is a macro made to define constants?

Question

Possible Duplicate:
"static const" vs "#define" in c

A macro is a fragment of code which has been given a name. Whenever the name is used, it is replaced by the contents of the macro. (No memory required)

So, people use it as a method to define constants instead of the syntax: const int num = 1;

Is this a good habit? Is the MACRO set to do another things additionally to #include and #define?

So how can i delete it, sorry... there are answers... – nEAnnam Sep 03 '11 at 01:30 — nEAnnam, Sep 03 '11 at 01:30

score 3 · Accepted Answer · answered Sep 03 '11 at 01:23

3

Macros can be used for other reasons than just defining constants. Nowadays, macro usage is generally frowned upon unless there are absolutely no other options available.

Debugging complex code with macros littered throughout can cause you more than one headache.

From GCC docs:

A macro is a fragment of code which has been given a name. Whenever the name is used, it is replaced by the contents of the macro.

answered Sep 03 '11 at 01:23

Demian Brecht

21,135
5
42
46

And there are plenty of things macros can do that nothing else can. – Seth Carnegie Sep 03 '11 at 01:51

score 3 · Answer 2 · answered Sep 03 '11 at 01:25

Consts are generally preferred for several reasons. For example, they are a lenguage construct (not an external value processed by the preprocessor). Also, they contain type information, so they help the compiler to detect compiling errors, etc. In most cases, you could say they are equivalent, but const is "semantically more correct".

Is a macro made to define constants?

2 Answers2