From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 1 11:46:50 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F76C106566B for ; Fri, 1 May 2009 11:46:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from christoph.mallon@gmx.de) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D9B858FC18 for ; Fri, 1 May 2009 11:46:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from christoph.mallon@gmx.de) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 01 May 2009 11:46:48 -0000 Received: from p54A3F073.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO tron.homeunix.org) [84.163.240.115] by mail.gmx.net (mp060) with SMTP; 01 May 2009 13:46:48 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1673122 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19GE8pVJ7lGIwTYO2Bmfvc4njZ+1ttgjLZdozsvqI 8ECId6aOhp03iy Message-ID: <49FAE126.5050903@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 13:46:46 +0200 From: Christoph Mallon User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090412) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Elischer References: <20090428114754.GB89235@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <20090430.090226.1569754707.imp@bsdimp.com> <20090430233648.GA95360@keira.kiwi-computer.com> <20090430.183727.803597558.imp@bsdimp.com> <49FA8E88.1040905@gmx.de> <49FAB3D8.90607@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <49FAB3D8.90607@elischer.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.65 Cc: rick-freebsd2008@kiwi-computer.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: C99: Suggestions for style(9) X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 11:46:50 -0000 Julian Elischer schrieb: > Christoph Mallon wrote: >> No, this is not what I intended. The idea is to limit the scope of >> local variables as much as is sensible. Maybe I should have been more >> explicit. On the other hand, I also did not mention that it is just >> about moving to the start of inner block statements. > > I can see moving declarations to an inner scope {} in some cases but > I think allowing us to declare them mixed in with the code, > (even though some compilers allow it) will be a mistake. Some compilers? According to my information every compiler, which is even remotely relevant, supports it. Even PCC claims it does! The only compiler, which I am aware of and which has a relevant distribution, which doesn't support it, is MSVC - but I highly doubt, that it is relevant in any way for FreeBSD. > I think this was done to allow macros to declare vars they needed. > I'd hate to see it in our code.. You are accusing me for proposing changes because "I felt like it", but all you give is "I'd hate [...] it" and "[it] will be a mistake" without any further justification. It seems to me, that you're applying double standards. /: Christoph