From: Hugh Sasse <hgs@...>
Date: 2006-04-27T03:28:11+09:00
Subject: Re: possible defect in array.c

On Thu, 27 Apr 2006, Pat Eyler wrote:

> On 4/26/06, Jacob Fugal <lukfugl@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 4/26/06, Pat Eyler <rubypate@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > good idea:
> > >
> > > *** array.c     12 Dec 2005 16:46:59 -0000      1.186
> > > --- array.c     26 Apr 2006 15:27:05 -0000
> > > ***************
> > > *** 2100,2105 ****
> > > --- 2100,2106 ----
> > >   {
> > >       VALUE item, arg1, arg2;
> > >       long beg, end, len;
> > > +     beg = 0;
> > >       VALUE *p, *pend;
> > >       int block_p = Qfalse;
> >
> > Actually, that'd be a syntax error in C. All variable declarations in
> > C must precede all other statements.
> 
> More proof that I'm not a C hacker.  I did compile after making the
> change and didn't see any errors from gcc:

Whilst considering details, are there any compilers around these
days that need the bigger things declared first, so they get byte
boundaries correct?  Or did that disappear when we left K&R C
behind?  OTTOMH I'm not sure about the relative sizes of these
(VALUE *, long, VALUE) anyway...

        Thanks
        Hugh