From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: doesn't this look incorrect? Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2022 14:19:45 +0200 Message-ID: <83wn7fnue6.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87v8mzfy4k.fsf@telefonica.net> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="1415"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 28 13:19:44 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ozd6t-00009K-Bt for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 28 Nov 2022 13:19:43 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ozd6W-0000pf-6p; Mon, 28 Nov 2022 07:19:20 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ozd6T-0000om-3k for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Nov 2022 07:19:17 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ozd6S-0008Vp-G3; Mon, 28 Nov 2022 07:19:16 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=nwOX7gRwsIsab9lwCQD3zE3/6jPF6IRp+Y/C7XR0hf4=; b=BI8REjGQL3Ux Oc1uRujuvrdW+rr7Orb2mdqj67h3fxUXbhJeJYgH6ku4caHTYjl662/+afPhcvZUxilyRujXPxeLy 9T+LYuirnD9vuRsaKC+cpPsA4xLhZ2Sa7qfG2hbaX+9HOcrXrSh6Z8h/SnMmnnbcbwTbNILkvdl6p fPHIV6W67jLSw7ODXS+DOGN6N8tF0nr82ofJ9X9UQsyfZs2VAeCciRpxM35KRYfqYpUTFCTL8mBFW FexZ8oHC2LxlaX5demPBYbVAmZFmKy5bKulBWUUmyWJaCGZJwFtajsqD7RKXFug4aDd9ENC740NTr y/gytdkF1+3ht/Gz9XPDTw==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ozd6Q-0004yu-Rg; Mon, 28 Nov 2022 07:19:15 -0500 In-Reply-To: (tomas@tuxteam.de) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:300671 Archived-At: > Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2022 06:30:22 +0100 > From: > > > > static int isdead = 0; > > > > > > if (isdead == 2) > > > > > > This is apparently a mistake. > > > > I don't think so. See what `static' means for a variable declaration > > inside a function. > > Still it seems to me that Christopher has a point: the `if' doesn't > seem reachable from any other path, so `isdead' will be always zero > at that point? It will be "reachable" by the next call to this function. The code below the 'if' updates the variable, in several places.