tags:

views:

2014

answers:

6

Trying to create a macro which can be used for print debug messages when DEBUG is defined, like the following pseudo code:

#define DEBUG 1
#define debug_print(args ...) if (DEBUG) fprintf(stderr, args)

How is this accomplished with a macro?

+19  A: 

If you use a C99 compiler

#define debug_print(fmt, ...) \
            do { if (DEBUG) fprintf(stderr, fmt, __VA_ARGS__); } while (0)

It assumes you are using C99 (the variable argument list notation is not supported in earlier versions). The 'do { ... } while (0)' idiom ensures that the code acts like a statement (function call). The unconditional use of the code ensures that the compiler always checks that your debug code is valid - but the optimizer will remove the code when DEBUG is 0.

If you want to work with #ifdef DEBUG, then change the test condition:

#ifdef DEBUG
#define DEBUG_TEST 1
#else
#define DEBUG_TEST 0
#endif

And then use DEBUG_TEST where I used DEBUG.

If you insist on a string literal for the format string (probably a good idea anyway), you can also introduce things like __FILE__, __LINE__ and __func__ into the output, which can improve the diagnostics:

#define debug_print(fmt, ...) \
        do { if (DEBUG) fprintf(stderr, "%s:%d:%s(): " fmt, __FILE__, \
                                __LINE__, __func__, __VA_ARGS__); } while (0)

This relies on string concatenation to create a bigger format string than the programmer writes.

If you use a C89 compiler

If you are stuck with C89 and no useful compiler extension, then there isn't a particularly clean way to handle it. The technique I used to use was:

#define TRACE(x) do { if (DEBUG) dbg_printf x; } while (0)

And then, in the code, write:

TRACE(("message %d\n", var));

The double-parentheses are crucial - and are why you have the funny notation in the macro expansion. As before, the compiler always checks the code for syntactic validity (which is good) but the optimizer only invokes the printing function if the DEBUG macro evaluates to non-zero.

This does require a support function - dbg_printf() in the example - to handle things like 'stderr'. It requires you to know how to write varargs functions, but that isn't hard:

#include <stdarg.h>
#include <stdio.h>

void dbg_printf(const char *fmt, ...)
{
    va_list args;
    va_start(args, fmt);
    vfprintf(stderr, fmt, args);
    va_end(args);
}

You can also use this technique in C99, of course, but the __VA_ARGS__ technique is neater because it uses regular function notation, not the double-parentheses hack.

Why is it crucial that the compiler always see the debug code?

[Rehashing comments made to another answer.]

One central idea behind both the C99 and C89 implementations above is that the compiler proper always sees the debugging printf-like statements. This is important for long-term code - code that will last a decade or two.

Suppose a piece of code has been mostly dormant (stable) for a number of years, but now needs to be changed. You re-enable debugging trace - but it is frustrating to have to debug the debugging (tracing) code because it refers to variables that have been renamed or retyped, during the years of stable maintenance. If the compiler (post pre-processor) always sees the print statement, it ensures that any surrounding changes have not invalidated the diagnostics. If the compiler does not see the print statement, it cannot protect you against your own carelessness (or the carelessness of your colleagues or collaborators). See 'The Practice of Programming' by Kernighan and Pike -

This is 'been there, done that' experience - I used essentially the technique described in other answers where the non-debug build does not see the printf-like statements for a number of years (more than a decade). But I came across the advice in TPOP (see my previous comment), and then did enable some debugging code after a number of years, and ran into problems of changed context breaking the debugging. Several times, having the printing always validated has saved me from later problems.

I use NDEBUG to control assertions only, and a separate macro (usually DEBUG) to control whether debug tracing is built into the program. Even when the debug tracing is built in, I frequently do not want debug output to appear unconditionally, so I have mechanism to control whether the output appears (debug levels, and instead of calling fprintf() directly, I call a debug print function that only conditionally prints so the same build of the code can print or not print based on program options). I also have a 'multiple-subsystem' version of the code for bigger programs, so that I can have different sections of the program producing different amounts of trace - under runtime control.

I am advocating that for all builds, the compiler should see the diagnostic statements; however, the compiler won't generate any code for the debugging trace statements unless debug is enabled. Basically, it means that all of your code is checked by the compiler every time you compile - whether for release or debugging. This is a good thing!

debug.h - version 1.2 (1990-05-01)

/*
@(#)File:            $RCSfile: debug.h,v $
@(#)Version:         $Revision: 1.2 $
@(#)Last changed:    $Date: 1990/05/01 12:55:39 $
@(#)Purpose:         Definitions for the debugging system
@(#)Author:          J Leffler
*/

#ifndef DEBUG_H
#define DEBUG_H

/* -- Macro Definitions */

#ifdef DEBUG
#define TRACE(x)    db_print x
#else
#define TRACE(x)
#endif /* DEBUG */

/* -- Declarations */

#ifdef DEBUG
extern  int  debug;
#endif

#endif  /* DEBUG_H */

debug.h - version 3.6 (2008-02-11)

/*
@(#)File:           $RCSfile: debug.h,v $
@(#)Version:        $Revision: 3.6 $
@(#)Last changed:   $Date: 2008/02/11 06:46:37 $
@(#)Purpose:        Definitions for the debugging system
@(#)Author:         J Leffler
@(#)Copyright:      (C) JLSS 1990-93,1997-99,2003,2005,2008
@(#)Product:        :PRODUCT:
*/

#ifndef DEBUG_H
#define DEBUG_H

#ifdef HAVE_CONFIG_H
#include "config.h"
#endif /* HAVE_CONFIG_H */

/*
** Usage:  TRACE((level, fmt, ...))
** "level" is the debugging level which must be operational for the output
** to appear. "fmt" is a printf format string. "..." is whatever extra
** arguments fmt requires (possibly nothing).
** The non-debug macro means that the code is validated but never called.
** -- See chapter 8 of 'The Practice of Programming', by Kernighan and Pike.
*/
#ifdef DEBUG
#define TRACE(x)    db_print x
#else
#define TRACE(x)    do { if (0) db_print x; } while (0)
#endif /* DEBUG */

#ifndef lint
#ifdef DEBUG
/* This string can't be made extern - multiple definition in general */
static const char jlss_id_debug_enabled[] = "@(#)*** DEBUG ***";
#endif /* DEBUG */
#ifdef MAIN_PROGRAM
const char jlss_id_debug_h[] = "@(#)$Id: debug.h,v 3.6 2008/02/11 06:46:37 jleffler Exp $";
#endif /* MAIN_PROGRAM */
#endif /* lint */

#include <stdio.h>

extern int      db_getdebug(void);
extern int      db_newindent(void);
extern int      db_oldindent(void);
extern int      db_setdebug(int level);
extern int      db_setindent(int i);
extern void     db_print(int level, const char *fmt,...);
extern void     db_setfilename(const char *fn);
extern void     db_setfileptr(FILE *fp);
extern FILE    *db_getfileptr(void);

/* Semi-private function */
extern const char *db_indent(void);

/**************************************\
** MULTIPLE DEBUGGING SUBSYSTEMS CODE **
\**************************************/

/*
** Usage:  MDTRACE((subsys, level, fmt, ...))
** "subsys" is the debugging system to which this statement belongs.
** The significance of the subsystems is determined by the programmer,
** except that the functions such as db_print refer to subsystem 0.
** "level" is the debugging level which must be operational for the
** output to appear. "fmt" is a printf format string. "..." is
** whatever extra arguments fmt requires (possibly nothing).
** The non-debug macro means that the code is validated but never called.
*/
#ifdef DEBUG
#define MDTRACE(x)  db_mdprint x
#else
#define MDTRACE(x)  do { if (0) db_mdprint x; } while (0)
#endif /* DEBUG */

extern int      db_mdgetdebug(int subsys);
extern int      db_mdparsearg(char *arg);
extern int      db_mdsetdebug(int subsys, int level);
extern void     db_mdprint(int subsys, int level, const char *fmt,...);
extern void     db_mdsubsysnames(char const * const *names);

#endif /* DEBUG_H */

Single argument C99 variant

Kyle Brandt asked:

Anyway to do this so debug_print still works even if there are no arguments? For example:

    debug_print("Foo");

There's one simple, old-fashioned hack:

debug_print("%s\n", "Foo");

The GCC-only solution also provides support for that.

However, you can do it with the straight C99 system by using:

#define debug_print(...) \
            do { if (DEBUG) fprintf(stderr, __VA_ARGS__); } while (0)

Compared to the first version, you lose the limited checking that requires the 'fmt' argument, which means that someone could call 'debug_print()' with no arguments. Whether the loss of checking is a problem at all is debatable.

Jonathan Leffler
Anyway to do this so debug_print still works even if there are not arguments? IE debug_print("Foo"); ?
Kyle Brandt
There's always the old-fashioned hack: debug_print("%s\n", "Foo"); :D I'll try to work out whether there's an alternative. The GCC-only solution provides support for that.
Jonathan Leffler
+2  A: 
#define debug_print(FMT, ARGS...) do { \
    if (DEBUG) \
        fprintf(stderr, "%s:%d " FMT "\n", __FUNCTION__, __LINE__, ## ARGS); \
    } while (0)
eyalm
Which version of C supports that notation? And, if it worked, the token pasting all the arguments like that means that you have only a very limited set of options for the format string, doesn't it?
Jonathan Leffler
@Jonathan: gcc (Debian 4.3.3-13) 4.3.3
eyalm
OK - agreed: it is documented as an old GNU extension (section 5.17 of the GCC 4.4.1 manual). But you should probably document that it will only work with GCC - or maybe we've done that between us in these comments.
Jonathan Leffler
My intention was to show another style of using args and mainly to demonstrate the usage of __FUNCTION__ and __LINE__
eyalm
+3  A: 

I would do something like

#ifdef DEBUG
#define debug_print(fmt, ...) fprintf(stderr, fmt, __VA_ARGS__)
#else
#define debug_print(fmt, ...) do {} while (0)
#endif

I think this is cleaner.

LB
It is better to have the compiler always check the debug printing code...
Jonathan Leffler
I don't really like the idea of using a macro inside a test as a flag. Could you explain why the debug printing should be always checked ?
LB
@Jonathan: If the code only ever gets executed in debug mode, why should you care if it compiles in non-debug mode? `assert()` from the stdlib works the same way and I normally just re-use the `NDEBUG` macro for my own debugging code...
Christoph
using DEBUG in the test, if someone does an uncontrolled undef DEBUG, your code no longer compiles. right ?
LB
It is frustrating to enable debugging and then have to debug the debugging code because it refers to variables that have been renamed or retyped, etc. If the compiler (post pre-processor) always sees the print statement, it ensures that any surrounding changes have not invalidated the diagnostics. If the compiler does not see the print statement, it cannot protect you against your own carelessness (or the carelessness of your colleagues or collaborators). See 'The Practice of Programming' by Kernighan and Pike - http://plan9.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/tpop/.
Jonathan Leffler
@Jonathan: that's why you add `-DNDEBUG` only for release builds (or testing thereof)
Christoph
This is 'been there, done that' experience - I used essentially the technique described in this answer for a number of years (more than a decade). But I came across the advice in TPOP (see my previous comment), and then did enable some debugging code after a number of years, and ran into problems of changed context breaking the debugging. Several times, having the printing always validated has saved me from later problems. NB: You can simplify the non-debug macro replacement text to '((void)0)'.
Jonathan Leffler
@Christoph: well, sort of...I use NDEBUG to control assertions only, and a separate macro (usually DEBUG) to control debug tracing. I frequently do not want debug output to appear unconditionally, so I have mechanism to control whether the output appears (debug levels, and instead of calling fprintf() directly, I call a debug print function that only conditionally prints so the same build of the code can print or not print based on program options). I am advocating that for all builds, the compiler should see the diagnostic statements; however, it won't generate code unless debug is enabled.
Jonathan Leffler
@Jon, good explanations and nice references. Just one question, on what do you base your conditional prints (what is the condition inside the test.) You map the program options to variabes ? and then use these variables or rather define DEBUG according to the program options ?
LB
@LB: I actually call a printing function unconditionally, and it decides whether to print (see the headers in my answer - which is currently the accepted answer). The global variable debug was set to a debugging level (zero or negative, no output; increasing positive number give more output, in general), and the TRACE() macro included the debugging level as the first argument: TRACE((3, "Hi")); was a level 3 debugging statement - calling db_print(3, "Hi"). I normally have command line options to turn on debugging: -d turns on level 3, and -Dn turns it on to level n. [...to be continued...]
Jonathan Leffler
@LB: ... You could write the non-debug version of the macro as 'do { if (0) print_function(...); } while (0)'. You could have the debug version as 'do { if (debug) printf_function(...); } while (0)', etc. There are lots of ways to do it - C is more Perl like than Perl, sometimes! (Perl's motto is TMTOWTDI - Tim-Toady - There's More Than One Way To Do It.)
Jonathan Leffler
A minor point: I would use `((void)0)` instead of an empty do-loop
Loadmaster
+1  A: 

Here's the version I use:

#ifdef NDEBUG
#define Dprintf(FORMAT, ...) ((void)0)
#define Dputs(MSG) ((void)0)
#else
#define Dprintf(FORMAT, ...) \
    fprintf(stderr, "%s() in %s, line %i: " FORMAT "\n", \
     __func__, __FILE__, __LINE__, __VA_ARGS__)
#define Dputs(MSG) Dprintf("%s", MSG)
#endif
Christoph
+2  A: 

For a portable (ISO C90) implementation, you could use double parentheses, like this;

#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdarg.h>

#ifndef NDEBUG
#  define debug_print(msg) stderr_printf msg
#else
#  define debug_print(msg) (void)0
#endif

void
stderr_printf(const char *fmt, ...)
{
  va_list ap;
  va_start(ap, fmt);
  vfprintf(stderr, fmt, ap);
  va_end(ap);
}

int
main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
  debug_print(("argv[0] is %s, argc is %d\n", argv[0], argc));
  return 0;
}

or (hackish, wouldn't recommend it)

#include <stdio.h>

#define _ ,
#ifndef NDEBUG
#  define debug_print(msg) fprintf(stderr, msg)
#else
#  define debug_print(msg) (void)0
#endif

int
main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
  debug_print("argv[0] is %s, argc is %d"_ argv[0] _ argc);
  return 0;
}
Marcin Koziuk
why do you define _ as , ?
LB
@LB: to make the preprocessor `think' there's just one argument, while letting _ to be expanded at a later stage.
Marcin Koziuk
A: 

Will the compiler (gcc) optimize statements like if(DEBUG) {...} out, if in production code the DEBUG macro is set to 0 ?

I understand that there are good reasons to leave the debug statements visible to the compiler, but a bad feeling remains.

-Pat

Pat