On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 12:29:19 +0100 (CET) mathieu.taillefum...@free.fr said:
> > Hmm, news to me. Must have missed that memo ;) ... AFAIK, it's always
> > been if ((x) && (!y)) in EFL for over 5-10 years now...
>
> this is honsetly a minor enough point on the list - that its a close tie. i
> prefer if ((x) && (y == 3)) myself. i like to clearly group the logic entities
> as its clear then just what you meant in the code.
>
> It is fine by me too even if I prefer (x & (y==3)). However is there any
> reasons why the dummy variables (loop variables) should be declared in the
> core of the function ?
grouping. variables are delcared in groups at the top of a block. it's nicer to
find them and know their scope. their scope is the entire { } block. it's
easier to choose a var name as when you choose it you have the list of
siblings. as opposed to
int i;
for (i = .. ) {
...
}
....
...
int i;
for (i = ...) {
...
}
you forgot you already had i - you have to scan ALL the code up to the next
block start in case u declared it in between - i just dont like having to hunt
down where the delcarations and their types are. if its at the top of a { }
block they are easy to find :)
so if you can provide an updated patch... that'd be awesome :)
--
------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" --------------
The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) ras...@rasterman.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE:
Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen.
Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle.
Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
