On 11/10/21 10:14 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > Hello Zack, > > On 10/10/2021 20:25, zack leung wrote: >> I recently was invited to look at a new code review tool by Joel. It's used >> to help with reducing technical debt. It suggests various fixes and >> highlights various possible errors. One of them relates to the fact that >> some of the variable scopes and be reduced. For example, we can define >> variables when they are needed not at the beginning of functions. I don't >> know if it matters much. Maybe it helps with memory due to the timing of >> things allocated on the stack. This also helps with the compiler not >> needing to analyze long lifespans. This also prevents the variable to be >> flagged as uninitialized. > > I guess modern compiler don't care about when you define a variable. It is > probably more an issue for the human reader. > >> But personally, I feel it's easier to read if we don't change where >> variables are defined. An example of this is found in >> testsuites/mptests/mp09/task1.c. An array called recieve_Buffer could be >> defined later. I'm not sure if this matters much. I want to know your >> input. > > Moving the variable to the most local scope is already covered by the current > coding style (I hope). Maybe this needs to be clarified in the coding style. > > From my point of view we should go one step further and allow the declaration > and preferably also the initialization of local variables as close to their > first use as possible in contrast to only the scope begin.
I am OK with this if we have a suitable means to detect and handle shadowed variables. Chris _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
