From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 29 14:15:35 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1F5B16A4CE for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2005 14:15:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from comp.chem.msu.su (comp.chem.msu.su [158.250.32.97]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57DFA43D53 for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2005 14:15:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from yar@comp.chem.msu.su) Received: from comp.chem.msu.su (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by comp.chem.msu.su (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j0TEFRnZ081168; Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:15:27 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from yar@comp.chem.msu.su) Received: (from yar@localhost) by comp.chem.msu.su (8.12.9p2/8.12.9/Submit) id j0TEFQW8081167; Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:15:26 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from yar) Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:15:25 +0300 From: Yar Tikhiy To: Warner Losh Message-ID: <20050129141525.GB71245@comp.chem.msu.su> References: <20050128173327.GI61409@myrddin.originative.co.uk> <20050128.114919.71097322.imp@bsdimp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050128.114919.71097322.imp@bsdimp.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i cc: arch@freebsd.org cc: paul@originative.co.uk Subject: Re: c99/c++ localised variable definition X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 14:15:35 -0000 On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 11:49:19AM -0700, Warner Losh wrote: > > So, are we going to start allowing this feature to be used in FreeBSD > > since it would require a pretty major change to style(9). > > People differ as to the efficacy of such usage. Either they love it > and can't understand why people wouldn't want to see definitions close > to where they are used. Or they hate it and can't understand why > you'd want to go searching for a definition when the one, true, > god-given place is at the top of the function. Often times, no > further discourse is possible because both sides know they are right, > and the other side is a bunch of butt picking monekys that clearly > should get out of the stone age... ...And which is even worse, the source code itself becomes a battleground for the two uncompromising sides. We have bloodstained src/ spots in plenty. Perhaps we need a law to stop the bloodshed, like it was in the Wild West? :-) It's becoming hard to find a scoped variable definition in some source files. And currently I cannot see a paragraph in style(9) on where local vars should be defined. Am I getting blind? -- Yar