git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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 --]

  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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).