This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.
A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/gerrit-log@lists.osmocom.org/.
Neels Hofmeyr gerrit-no-reply at lists.osmocom.orgPatch Set 2: Code-Review-2 > As the variable is local to the for loop, it is declared at the > "top of the block", so I think your change actually makes it worse > by exposing a varaible that has no significance outside of the > block to outside code. I am totally with you. In gtphub, I first had variable declarations right above where I use them. But then Holger asked me to stay in osmocom style, which wants to have vars declared on top. I would be the first to cheer when this style were dropped, my single reason to move this var declaration was http://i.stack.imgur.com/MyQki.jpg (Actually, this was Holger's reference to justify that style.) And probably that I'm not sufficiently aware of the C99 standard: > isn't it C99? i like to move local vars in that context where it > is. is there any coding style reference? Let's drop this patch then. (Let's see how gerrit handles a branch resubmission with one commit from it gone; just abandoning this will cause merge conflicts...) -- To view, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/178 To unsubscribe, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/settings Gerrit-MessageType: comment Gerrit-Change-Id: Ie6f3394a18b6157f14469f676fff6849a503b694 Gerrit-PatchSet: 2 Gerrit-Project: openbsc Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Owner: Neels Hofmeyr <nhofmeyr at sysmocom.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: Harald Welte <laforge at gnumonks.org> Gerrit-Reviewer: Jenkins Builder Gerrit-Reviewer: Neels Hofmeyr <nhofmeyr at sysmocom.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: lynxis lazus <lynxis at fe80.eu> Gerrit-HasComments: No