Julian Elischer schrieb:
Christoph Mallon wrote:
You are mistaken. Re-read the "if": It already contains a "return;" as
then-part. The declaration of "bp" has no relation to the "if".
In fact this is very good: "bp" can only be used after the "if",
because it is declared after it. Further, it most probably is only
assigned a value once, so declaration and the signle assignment are in
the same place, which aids readability and makes the code more concise.
the fact that people misread it allows me to say
"the defense rests m'lord"
Non sequitur. Warner wrote the "return;" in the same line as the if,
which easily hides it. If the "return;" wasn't there, the original
statement would be almost correct - actually it would be a compile
error, because if (x) int i; is not allowed[1].
Christoph
[1] if (x) { int i; } is allowed, of course.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
