From: "brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] revision: use C99 declaration of variable in for() loop
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2021 22:26:32 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YZLemOWM0rAuRTRe@camp.crustytoothpaste.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqpmr2j5lq.fsf_-_@gitster.g>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2188 bytes --]
On 2021-11-15 at 06:27:45, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> There are certain C99 features that might be nice to use in our code
> base, but we've hesitated to do so in order to avoid breaking
> compatibility with older compilers. But we don't actually know if
> people are even using pre-C99 compilers these days.
>
> One way to figure that out is to introduce a very small use of a
> feature, and see if anybody complains, and we've done so to probe
> the portability for a few features like "trailing comma in enum
> declaration", "designated initializer for struct", and "designated
> initializer for array". A few years ago, we tried to use a handy
>
> for (int i = 0; i < n; i++)
> use(i);
>
> to introduce a new variable valid only in the loop, but found that
> some compilers we cared about didn't like it back then. Two years
> is a long-enough time, so let's try it agin.
I think you absolutely need a compiler option for this to work on older
systems. Many of those compilers support C99 just fine but need an
option to enable it.
I think this could go on top of my patch, though.
> If this patch can survive a few releases without complaint, then we
> can feel more confident that variable declaration in for() loop is
> supported by the compilers our user base use. And if we do get
> complaints, then we'll have gained some data and we can easily
> revert this patch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
> ---
> revision.c | 4 +---
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/revision.c b/revision.c
> index 9dff845bed..44492f2c02 100644
> --- a/revision.c
> +++ b/revision.c
> @@ -43,10 +43,8 @@ static inline int want_ancestry(const struct rev_info *revs);
>
> void show_object_with_name(FILE *out, struct object *obj, const char *name)
> {
> - const char *p;
> -
> fprintf(out, "%s ", oid_to_hex(&obj->oid));
> - for (p = name; *p && *p != '\n'; p++)
> + for (const char *p = name; *p && *p != '\n'; p++)
> fputc(*p, out);
> fputc('\n', out);
> }
> --
> 2.34.0-rc2-165-g9b3c04af29
>
--
brian m. carlson (he/him or they/them)
Toronto, Ontario, CA
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 262 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-15 23:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-13 12:28 [PATCH] MyFirstContribution.txt: fix undeclared variable i in sample code Saksham Mittal
2021-11-13 13:05 ` Johannes Altmanninger
2021-11-13 13:08 ` Saksham Mittal
2021-11-14 6:41 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-11-14 14:28 ` Is 'for (int i = [...]' bad for C STD compliance reasons? (was: [PATCH] MyFirstContribution.txt: fix undeclared variable i in sample code) Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-11-14 18:03 ` Is 'for (int i = [...]' bad for C STD compliance reasons? Junio C Hamano
2021-11-14 18:25 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-11-14 18:57 ` brian m. carlson
2021-11-14 19:33 ` Carlo Arenas
2021-11-14 19:01 ` Carlo Arenas
2021-11-15 6:27 ` [PATCH] revision: use C99 declaration of variable in for() loop Junio C Hamano
2021-11-15 7:44 ` Martin Ågren
2021-11-16 8:29 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-11-15 22:26 ` brian m. carlson [this message]
2021-11-17 11:03 ` Phillip Wood
2021-11-17 12:39 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-11-17 22:30 ` SZEDER Gábor
2021-11-18 7:09 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-12-07 11:10 ` Phillip Wood
2021-12-07 20:37 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-12-08 12:17 ` Removing -Wdeclaration-after-statement (was: [PATCH] revision: use C99 declaration of variable in for() loop) Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-12-08 17:05 ` Removing -Wdeclaration-after-statement Junio C Hamano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YZLemOWM0rAuRTRe@camp.crustytoothpaste.net \
--to=sandals@crustytoothpaste.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.