From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, FSL_HELO_FAKE,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F8D81F461 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 00:42:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728848AbfGQAmg (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jul 2019 20:42:36 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-f194.google.com ([209.85.214.194]:37288 "EHLO mail-pl1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726344AbfGQAmg (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jul 2019 20:42:36 -0400 Received: by mail-pl1-f194.google.com with SMTP id b3so10994481plr.4 for ; Tue, 16 Jul 2019 17:42:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=H/XAAytDE81mEJgrihmmrxF90L4Og4JVu//n9qtcRtc=; b=BP+m2XB85afgv/GQTUD1pI0pMk13ZNS3kv1UbL86WI/rQ1gezBBnwZASlzv98SXa9N YIAbd753PrcRspKG4eVfh/DxtCN+pQqAJknxWFBVnNEBBi7qu+xNYB6NP7UvRMhNVN4v 4Ft5RUsl5U7hbrpM4Xf76TznkjX0VU1Zu1mr7bCxtxaaSX0YoXUV0n+YafjcMN1VFg8U P5eJCQtXprICYTyuaoY/nry6QylqLvo7odv2lfqJ7uRc9TOXQEtri0XJx2ePZOBfemSS qm6NESM65fMQRcIlb0nusanzG2o5I6IRr5G4/5sJlT1/2YeVyZY3y4h5xtNQryTgtzwC FnyA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=H/XAAytDE81mEJgrihmmrxF90L4Og4JVu//n9qtcRtc=; b=SMlDGAByg2epvWTdzriABLLPo0QC3jYFVqR/Pbkmk+REksfWhydvihs0sCMelcMqIY 4xLRtTuJOVUnE9d0EAFbiAslm8eRwtGkvNnZOUSBOxQGoLa17b0g6EBvgqduhcCBX0Bb 3rGAlaSaxbBme79JYBEYlxUICe5M59CiIu6qRlNT5igW/HfSw4s5iDcukgLqriCsneGW Ad+pRcSDGqR33zozlMoXuVQVDAbARvdCpKp/KkI0DfoxZrQI6XFI4PSueNc90BzgKAxJ tKIaGO2WVJ2JmK3jORotZsBzyan5MlRAR1KMc7odNK3hxABAuOIXJU+0ZHxPY4bS/ElU ek/Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUUx8QjbZLifpRHwOhlMjHc+MxQvkW2/95ad9JQ9RyrD15ShOfe 0TkB60q5TtmeEEJVKmR81UQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz4vWabv4oTp+cIbAM9eLq9iJ6vnP7QpCFbNoQwvUycGJQ5MtwspLVmULRlKiwKx9onB4yKRA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:9896:: with SMTP id s22mr37645235plp.4.1563324154975; Tue, 16 Jul 2019 17:42:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com ([2620:15c:2ce:200:cf67:1de0:170f:be65]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x67sm24897675pfb.21.2019.07.16.17.42.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 16 Jul 2019 17:42:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 17:42:31 -0700 From: Jonathan Nieder To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Emily Shaffer , Carlo Arenas , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] transport-helper: avoid var decl in for () loop control Message-ID: <20190717004231.GA93801@google.com> References: <20190702005340.66615-1-emilyshaffer@google.com> <20190709211043.48597-1-emilyshaffer@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano wrote: > We do allow a few selected C99 constructs in our codebase these > days, but this is not among them (yet). > > Reported-by: Carlo Arenas > Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano > --- > transport.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) Yes, gcc 4.8 fails to build without this: transport.c:1234:4: error: ‘for’ loop initial declarations are only allowed in C99 mode for (struct ref *it = remote_refs; it; it = it->next) ^ transport.c:1234:4: note: use option -std=c99 or -std=gnu99 to compile your code Arguably it would be nice to use -std=gnu99 for better consistency between gcc versions, but it's moot here: avoiding the declaration in for loop initializer is more consistent with -Wdeclaration-after-statement anyway. Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder Thanks.