On May 28, 2014, at 4:00 PM, Ethan Jackson <et...@nicira.com> wrote:
> FWIW I'd prefer we don't mix declarations and code unless there's a
> clear reason to do it from a simplicity perspective. I.E. I think we
> should go from mandating that it's never allowed, to suggesting that
> it's discouraged. The reason is that most of the code doesn't do
> these things, and there's a value in consistency. That said, I don't
> feel strongly about it.
>
Does this cut it for you:
C DIALECT
Most C99 features are OK because they are widely implemented:
(snip)
* Mixing of declarations and code within a block. Please use this
judiciously; keep declarations nicely grouped together in the
beginning of a block if possible.
Jarno
> Ethan
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 03:31:03PM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
>>>
>>> On May 23, 2014, at 10:04 AM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 05:37:38PM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
>>>>> As even the MSVC 2013 now supports the C99 mixing of declarations and
>>>>> code, we can now allow them in OVS code.
>>>>>
>>>>> GCC (at least some versions of it) require the -std=c99 option to not
>>>>> issue warnings, and since we rely in GCC extensions when compiling
>>>>> with GCC, the option -std=gnu99 is now added to the CFLAGS by
>>>>> configure, if the compiler accepts it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jarno Rajahalme <jrajaha...@nicira.com>
>>>>
>>>> Are you sure that this line in configure.ac isn't the root of the
>>>> problem?
>>>>
>>>> OVS_ENABLE_OPTION([-Wdeclaration-after-statement])
>>>
>>> I did not notice this, sorry. It turned out to be the problem, so there is
>>> no need to add the -std option.
>>>
>>> I left in the change in transliterating the ?=? as well as ?-? to ?_? so
>>> that if we ever need to add options with ?=? in them, there should be no
>>> problems in doing so.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm still really nervous about this one (I think it often uglifies code)
>>>> but let's give it a shot:
>>>>
>>>
>>> If it turns out to be too ugly we can always take this one back.
>>>
>>>>> - * Don't mix declarations and code within a block.
>>>>> + * Mixing of declarations and code within a block.
>>>>
>>>>> + Don't use other C99 features that are not widely implemented in
>>>>> +older compilers:
>>>>> +
>>>>
>>>> We have enough of these in the source that I think they're not a problem
>>>> in practice anymore, so let's delete this one too:
>>>>
>>>>> * Don't put a trailing comma in an enum declaration (e.g. don't
>>>>> write "enum { x = 1, };").
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ok, I?ll change this too. How about this incremental:
>>
>> That's fine, thank you.
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev mailing list
>> dev@openvswitch.org
>> http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
