From: Pat Eyler <rubypate@...>
Date: 2006-04-27T12:30:50+09:00
Subject: Re: possible defect in array.c

On 4/26/06, Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2006/4/27, Sam Roberts <sroberts@uniserve.com>:
> > Are you sure? It appears to support non-standard extensions in both C99
> > and C89 dialects. I'm not complaining, the extensions are useful, but
> > just because gcc compiled it doesn't mean its standard C, of any
> > particular dialect.
>
> Well, you're correct it has its own extensions not only C99 and C89
> standards, and you need -pedaintic-errors option to let gcc be strict
> with them.  But it doesn't croak if -std=c99 is also given, and I
> thought it is the default in gcc4, IIRC.
> I meant that change about the based standards.
>

So, does it make more sense to go with Jacob's suggestion, or to move
the assignment to the end of the variable declarations.   Either way, it's
a simple change that knocks out one more potential issue.



> --
> Nobu Nakada
>
>