Does it matter?

Inline functions are preferred over macros in most C++ style guides, and should only be used where absolutely necessary.

In the case of safe_delete, an inline function is just as applicable, which means a macro isn't necessary.

 

template<class T> void safe_delete(T* x) { delete x; x = NULL; }

BTW, the if isn't necessary, as delete NULL; is valid (it does nothing) -- the if statement is often put there by programmers who learned on MSVC 6.0, which implemented "Microsoft C++", rather than C++98.

 

The main evilness about macros is that they don't obey C++ name scoping rules, so they can inadvertantly break other code.

e.g. say that I buy your code as a bit of middleware, and #include it into my own code that follows:

 

#include "cool_middleware.h"
namespace hodgman
{
  template<class T> void safe_delete(T* x) { if(x) x->Release; }
 
  void Frobnicate(Foo* foo)
  {
    foo->DoStuff();
    safe_delete(foo);
  }
}

This as soon as I #include your code in this file, my code breaks because of the macro! It becomes quite different:

 

 
  void Frobnicate(Foo* foo)
  {
    foo->DoStuff();
    if(foo) { delete foo; foo = NULL; }
  }

If you'd used an inline function for safe_delete, then everything would be fine

 

Further reading:

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq/inline-vs-macros.html

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq/macros-with-if.html

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq/macros-with-multi-stmts.html

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq/macros-with-token-pasting.html

Does it matter?

Inline functions are preferred over macros in most C++ style guides, and should only be used where absolutely necessary.

In the case of safe_delete, an inline function is just as applicable, which means a macro isn't necessary.

template<class T> void safe_delete(T* x) { delete x; x = NULL; }

BTW, the if isn't necessary, as delete NULL; is valid (it does nothing) -- the if statement is often put there by programmers who learned on MSVC 6.0, which implemented "Microsoft C++", rather than C++98.

 

The main evilness about macros is that they don't obey C++ name scoping rules, so they can inadvertantly break other code.

e.g. say that I buy your code as a bit of middleware, and #include it into my own code that follows:

#include "cool_middleware.h"
namespace hodgman
{
  template<class T> void safe_delete(T* x) { if(x) x->Release; x = 0; }
 
  void Frobnicate(Foo* foo)
  {
    foo->DoStuff();
    safe_delete(foo);
  }
}

This as soon as I #include your code in this file, my code breaks because of the macro! It becomes quite different:

 
  void Frobnicate(Foo* foo)
  {
    foo->DoStuff();
    if(foo) { delete foo; foo = NULL; }
  }

If you'd used an inline function for safe_delete, then everything would be fine

 

Further reading:

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq/inline-vs-macros.html

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq/macros-with-if.html

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq/macros-with-multi-stmts.html

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq/macros-with-token-pasting.html