From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri May  1 20:48:48 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 2F112106564A
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri,  1 May 2009 20:48:48 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from zbeeble@gmail.com)
Received: from mail-ew0-f171.google.com (mail-ew0-f171.google.com
	[209.85.219.171])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A94E8FC1E
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri,  1 May 2009 20:48:47 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from zbeeble@gmail.com)
Received: by ewy19 with SMTP id 19so2515144ewy.43
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 01 May 2009 13:48:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references
	:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
	bh=8/aynW+rH3syutbaGitYDSMw0GTw5jC9DenY2kiE2F4=;
	b=NpKyTXmbnGokoH0VtThn2KZ1jryTzL7tXojX+8QO7asHNhnHNHb/5fxRzrnuq3lPXa
	C89fSeqSv3Kz96ltsCtpX+A9mujlbcn/9yIwrueHcFWSIfYk/cK3Sk0gHjgTiF9TS2Fl
	zthmFHia+nPmyW5+tQ16yMc0teEm8T5e1p2pk=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:cc:content-type;
	b=qDcuWITKdN5cB7w1xhZYRQHv4pci228SDxamB9uciTIoJh6A7RhblOc8IvnfnFKdHS
	uB3ntBJMSRi+OuusP2FBvwWwvK+DL5n9g/ZOSN5KPI2zfn+VZ4q5pHJEDvzuRqLQqWnI
	JatdSDm14K6y0EG9hxYRSN8v4mBti531zsDIc=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.210.10.8 with SMTP id 8mr903815ebj.49.1241209445081; Fri, 01 
	May 2009 13:24:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <49FAB322.9030103@elischer.org>
References: <49F4070C.2000108@gmx.de>
	<20090428114754.GB89235@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
	<20090430.090226.1569754707.imp@bsdimp.com> <49FA8D73.6040207@gmx.de>
	<49FAB322.9030103@elischer.org>
Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 16:24:05 -0400
Message-ID: <5f67a8c40905011324s2ad5e02dy47c73ae950845b54@mail.gmail.com>
From: Zaphod Beeblebrox <zbeeble@gmail.com>
To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Christoph Mallon <christoph.mallon@gmx.de>
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
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 20:48:48 -0000

On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 4:30 AM, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> wrote=
:

> As an old-fart I have found many cases where what I thought was
> a silly style rule, turned out to save my work in some way.
>
> Christoph Mallon wrote:
>
>
>
>>>
>>>    struct foo *fp;
>>>    struct bar *bp;
>>>
>>>    fp =3D get_foo();
>>>    if (!fp) return;
>>>    bp =3D fp->bp;
>>>
>>> this can't easily be translated to the more natural:
>>>
>>>    struct foo *fp =3D get_foo();
>>>    struct bar *bp =3D fp->bp;
>>>
>>
> Well more natural for you, but not necessarily for everyone,
> and NOT the same as what is there now, as you noticed.
>
>
>
>>> since really you'd want to write:
>>>
>>>    struct foo *fp =3D get_foo();
>>>    if (!fp) return;
>>>    struct bar *bp =3D fp->bp;
>>>
>>> which isn't legal in 'C'.  However, we have enough where this isn't
>>>
>>
>> You're mistaken, this is perfectly legal C. See ISO/IEC 9899:1999 (E)
>> =A76.8.2:1. In short: you can mix statements and declarations.
>>
>
Sure, but it's still very  bad: If I'm not mistaken, this would mean that
"bp" would only be valid within the "if" clause --- which isn't very useful=
.