From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed May 21 13:36:29 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA04557
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 21 May 1997 13:36:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from awfulhak.demon.co.uk (awfulhak.demon.co.uk [158.152.17.1])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA04541
          for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 21 May 1997 13:36:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from awfulhak.demon.co.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by awfulhak.demon.co.uk (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA20321;
	Wed, 21 May 1997 20:44:00 +0100 (BST)
Message-Id: <199705211944.UAA20321@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.9 8/22/96
To: Thomas David Rivers <ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com>
cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Variable initialization 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 20 May 1997 07:18:11 EDT."
             <199705201118.HAA25363@lakes.water.net> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 20:43:59 +0100
From: Brian Somers <brian@awfulhak.org>
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

I'll retry sending that.... dodgy reply addresses ! ;)

[.....]
>  I believe, of course, some of the other arguments far outweigh
> this concern - personally, I much prefer initializations that are
> performed outside of the declaration block... for about the same
> reasons cited.

Heh.  Not so long ago, I wrote code like:

    int f = 0;
    FILE *file = fopen( myfile, "r" );

    for( ; f < maxf; f++ )
    {
        ....

It's quite tricky making yourself change so much !  I'm starting
to like style(9) though (because of discussions like this that
explain the reasoning).

> 	- Dave Rivers -
> 
> 

-- 
Brian <brian@awfulhak.org>, <brian@freebsd.org>
      <http://www.awfulhak.org>
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour....