5 May
2004
5 May
'04
4:35 a.m.
You could make it to
{ int x; for(x=0;;) }
instead, which is allowed in most older C compilers too (I think -- at least Pike uses it in a lot of macros).
This will disallow (broken(?)) use of x after the for scope.
/ Mirar
Previous text:
2004-05-05 10:32: Subject: precompile.pike
No.
for(int x=0;;)
will become
int x; for(x=0;;)
As far as I know, that should not break things.
/ Marcus Agehall (Scanian)