On 4/19/18, Manish Jain wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> One of the historical artefacts of the C language has been the burden of
> lugging around multiple declarations in a single statement, with some
> well-known pitfalls:
>
> int* ptr1, ptr2;
>
> Since ptr2 looks like a pointer but actually is not, standar
Insulting people and insisting your preferred coding style (which is
not the one used by GCC's own code, by the way) is definitely a good
way to get people interested in your proposal.
> Wars have been fought over less.
I joined the list to make the request. So I just hope my war is not in a
lonely one-man army.
>> As for the problem of multiple declarations fraught in the suggestion
>> above, I would like gcc developers to please consider a compiler option
>> (--single-declar
On 19/04/18 11:27, Manish Jain wrote:
>
> On 04/19/18 14:46, David Brown wrote:
>> Certainly it is heavily used in existing code - making an option
>> to disable it would be impractical.
>
> Thanks for replying, Mr. Brown.
>
> What I meant was if an option could be provided, existing code could
On 04/19/18 14:46, David Brown wrote:
> Certainly it is heavily used in existing code - making an option
> to disable it would be impractical.
Thanks for replying, Mr. Brown.
What I meant was if an option could be provided, existing code could
compile without the option, and fresh code to compi
On 19 April 2018 at 09:09, Manish Jain wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> One of the historical artefacts of the C language has been the burden of
> lugging around multiple declarations in a single statement, with some
> well-known pitfalls:
>
> int* ptr1, ptr2;
>
> Since ptr2 looks like a pointer but actually i
On 19/04/18 10:09, Manish Jain wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> One of the historical artefacts of the C language has been the burden of
> lugging around multiple declarations in a single statement, with some
> well-known pitfalls:
>
> int* ptr1, ptr2;
>
> Since ptr2 looks like a pointer but actually is n
