On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 8:32 PM, Martin S. Weber wrote:
> Which reminds me, try building your code with either c89 as compiler or
> pass -ansi to gcc. There's still a fix necessary for fossil's sha1
> computation (see previous thread starting at http://www.mail-archive.com/*
> *fossil-users@lists.
On 09/16/11 14:26, Stephan Beal wrote:
To be clear: i'm not going to argue either way, i just want to conform.
Which reminds me, try building your code with either c89 as compiler or pass
-ansi to gcc. There's still a fix necessary for fossil's sha1 computation (see
previous thread starting a
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Stephan Beal wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Which of these is more correct for fossil's code style for if/else's which
> have only a single expression:
>
> if( ... ) continue;
> else break;
>
> or
>
> if( ... ){
> continue;
> }else{
> break;
> }
>
The second is correct. T
Hi!
Which of these is more correct for fossil's code style for if/else's which
have only a single expression:
if( ... ) continue;
else break;
or
if( ... ){
continue;
}else{
break;
}
(hypothetical example)
The question only applies to single-expression if/else/for/while/etc. For
others it'
4 matches
Mail list logo
