[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [gpsd-dev] gpsd style change?
From: |
Eric S. Raymond |
Subject: |
Re: [gpsd-dev] gpsd style change? |
Date: |
Wed, 11 Feb 2015 10:02:11 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) |
Greg Troxel <address@hidden>:
> I'm not against moving declarations to inner scopes, but IIRC that's a
> C99 vs C89 thing. We do need to be clear on the target language
> specification, vs coding to what whatever gcc version is installed
> accepts.
I don't understand how C89 vs. C99 enters into it. Explain?
For the record, I do assume C99. Among other things, the code makes
significant use of bool, designated initializers, and inline.
However, I don't intermix declarations with executable statements because
that gives splint the screaming fantods (dies with an internal error). Nor
does the code use variadic macros, flexible arrays, type-generic math,
or type complex.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- [gpsd-dev] gpsd style change?, Gary E. Miller, 2015/02/10
- Re: [gpsd-dev] gpsd style change?, Eric S. Raymond, 2015/02/10
- Re: [gpsd-dev] gpsd style change?, Greg Troxel, 2015/02/11
- Re: [gpsd-dev] gpsd style change?,
Eric S. Raymond <=
- Re: [gpsd-dev] gpsd style change?, Greg Troxel, 2015/02/11
- Re: [gpsd-dev] gpsd style change?, Eric S. Raymond, 2015/02/11
- Re: [gpsd-dev] gpsd style change?, Greg Troxel, 2015/02/11
- Re: [gpsd-dev] gpsd style change?, Gary E. Miller, 2015/02/11
- Re: [gpsd-dev] gpsd style change?, Eric S. Raymond, 2015/02/11