From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] /srv/bzr/emacs/trunk r109864: Fix minor problems found by static checking. Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2012 19:52:05 +0300 Message-ID: <83obllennu.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83392zf7bu.fsf@gnu.org> <87obll50f9.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1346777535 26157 80.91.229.3 (4 Sep 2012 16:52:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2012 16:52:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org, jasonr@gnu.org To: Andreas Schwab Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 04 18:52:16 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1T8wMJ-0002v4-2R for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2012 18:52:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52680 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T8wMG-00072Y-BS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2012 12:52:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:52239) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T8wMA-00072R-SE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2012 12:52:10 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T8wM4-0003X5-Hl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2012 12:52:06 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:46907) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T8wM4-0003Wy-AF; Tue, 04 Sep 2012 12:52:00 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0M9U0020043YYY00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Tue, 04 Sep 2012 19:51:55 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0M9U0022D46JRT60@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Tue, 04 Sep 2012 19:51:55 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.172 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:152999 Archived-At: > From: Andreas Schwab > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , Paul Eggert , emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2012 16:33:54 +0200 > > Jason Rumney writes: > > > It's not valid C89 is it? > > Sure it is. Declarations with initializer are allowed anywhere at the > start of the block. Yes. But the fragment I cited didn't show the block beginning, which is probably why Jason thought it's not valid C89. Here's more context (from another hunk of the same commit): --- a/src/xdisp.c 2012-09-02 17:10:35 +0000 +++ b/src/xdisp.c 2012-09-03 09:22:43 +0000 @@ -13511,9 +13511,10 @@ } else if (FRAME_VISIBLE_P (sf) && !FRAME_OBSCURED_P (sf)) { - Lisp_Object mini_window = FRAME_MINIBUF_WINDOW (sf); + Lisp_Object mini_window; struct frame *mini_frame; + mini_window = FRAME_MINIBUF_WINDOW (sf); displayed_buffer = XBUFFER (XWINDOW (selected_window)->buffer); /* Use list_of_error, not Qerror, so that we catch only errors and don't run the debugger. */