From 8a9965ea774e65e629b4479262dcd2c1cb705713 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: David Bremner Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2016 13:11:18 +2000 Subject: [PATCH] [PATCH 1/2] STYLE: document some rules about variable declarations --- 3e/2e0a764150c7431eebc9c9fc568030809336a9 | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 79 insertions(+) create mode 100644 3e/2e0a764150c7431eebc9c9fc568030809336a9 diff --git a/3e/2e0a764150c7431eebc9c9fc568030809336a9 b/3e/2e0a764150c7431eebc9c9fc568030809336a9 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..bac33e4cb --- /dev/null +++ b/3e/2e0a764150c7431eebc9c9fc568030809336a9 @@ -0,0 +1,79 @@ +Return-Path: +X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CE666DE0AF8 + for ; Sat, 13 Feb 2016 09:11:27 -0800 (PST) +X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -0.307 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.307 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.244, + RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.55, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled +Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1]) + by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) + with ESMTP id TVJ8ETaEBGqV for ; + Sat, 13 Feb 2016 09:11:25 -0800 (PST) +Received: from fethera.tethera.net (fethera.tethera.net [198.245.60.197]) + by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60ED26DE0A9A + for ; Sat, 13 Feb 2016 09:11:25 -0800 (PST) +Received: from remotemail by fethera.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.84) + (envelope-from ) + id 1aUdiV-0004K3-5I; Sat, 13 Feb 2016 12:10:43 -0500 +Received: (nullmailer pid 9990 invoked by uid 1000); + Sat, 13 Feb 2016 17:11:23 -0000 +From: David Bremner +To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Subject: [PATCH 1/2] STYLE: document some rules about variable declarations +Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2016 13:11:18 -0400 +Message-Id: <1455383479-9946-1-git-send-email-david@tethera.net> +X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.6.4 +X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 +Precedence: list +List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." + +List-Unsubscribe: , + +List-Archive: +List-Post: +List-Help: +List-Subscribe: , + +X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2016 17:11:27 -0000 + +No-one seemed opposed to C99 style loop variable declarations. The +requirement to declare variables at the top of blocks is maybe a little +more contested, but I believe it reflects the status quo. +--- + devel/STYLE | 7 ++++--- + 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) + +diff --git a/devel/STYLE b/devel/STYLE +index 24bd548..b22d8d3 100644 +--- a/devel/STYLE ++++ b/devel/STYLE +@@ -25,9 +25,7 @@ The following nonsense code demonstrates many aspects of the style: + static some_type + function (param_type param, param_type param) + { +- int i; +- +- for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) { ++ for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { + int j; + + j = i + 10; +@@ -64,6 +62,9 @@ function (param_type param, param_type param) + * Code lines should be less than 80 columns and comments should be + wrapped at 70 columns. + ++* Variable declarations should be at the top of a block; C99 style ++ control variable declarations in for loops are also OK. ++ + Naming + ------ + +-- +2.6.4 + -- 2.26.2