C99: Suggestions for style(9)

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 4:30 AM, Julian Elischer <julian at elischer.org> wrote:

> As an old-fart I have found many cases where what I thought was
> a silly style rule, turned out to save my work in some way.
>
> Christoph Mallon wrote:
>
>
>
>>>
>>>    struct foo *fp;
>>>    struct bar *bp;
>>>
>>>    fp = get_foo();
>>>    if (!fp) return;
>>>    bp = fp->bp;
>>>
>>> this can't easily be translated to the more natural:
>>>
>>>    struct foo *fp = get_foo();
>>>    struct bar *bp = fp->bp;
>>>
>>
> Well more natural for you, but not necessarily for everyone,
> and NOT the same as what is there now, as you noticed.
>
>
>
>>> since really you'd want to write:
>>>
>>>    struct foo *fp = get_foo();
>>>    if (!fp) return;
>>>    struct bar *bp = fp->bp;
>>>
>>> which isn't legal in 'C'.  However, we have enough where this isn't
>>>
>>
>> You're mistaken, this is perfectly legal C. See ISO/IEC 9899:1999 (E)
>> §6.8.2:1. In short: you can mix statements and declarations.
>>
>
Sure, but it's still very  bad: If I'm not mistaken, this would mean that
"bp" would only be valid within the "if" clause --- which isn't very useful.