Re: scope reductions

2007-03-04 Thread Thomas Anders
Magnus Fromreide wrote: > So I should clean it up and submit it as a patch? IMHO yes. +Thomas -- Thomas Anders (thomas.anders at blue-cable.de) - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's

Re: scope reductions

2007-03-04 Thread Steve Friedl
with C89 compilers? > > No. > > In both cases the declarations is at the start of a block, and as far as > I know it have always been valid to declare variables at the start of a > block, even if it is an inner block. Steve the language lawyer concurs, with hearty appl

Re: scope reductions

2007-03-04 Thread Magnus Fromreide
On sön, 2007-03-04 at 13:55 +0100, Thomas Anders wrote: > Magnus Fromreide wrote: > > Are patches like the attached ones of interest for the project or should > > I just ignore such things when I see them? > > Cleanup is always appreciated. > > > The advantage of the patches is that they make the

Re: scope reductions

2007-03-04 Thread Thomas Anders
Magnus Fromreide wrote: > Are patches like the attached ones of interest for the project or should > I just ignore such things when I see them? Cleanup is always appreciated. > The advantage of the patches is that they make the code more local so > you do not have to keep track of lots of functio

scope reductions

2007-03-04 Thread Magnus Fromreide
Are patches like the attached ones of interest for the project or should I just ignore such things when I see them? The advantage of the patches is that they make the code more local so you do not have to keep track of lots of function scope variables, see for instance make-zone-local where there