From:	Erik Max Francis <max AT alcyone DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: compile warning
Date:	Sat, 10 May 1997 10:32:03 -0700
Organization:	Alcyone Systems
Lines:	27
Message-ID:	<3374B113.BA2DD4A@alcyone.com>
References:	<3373AC95 DOT 2D64 AT osu DOT edu> <5l10p2$541u AT news DOT doit DOT wisc DOT edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	newton.alcyone.com
Mime-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

John Fremlin wrote:

> This is ugly, C already has a nice keyword for doing this:
> 
>   for( int wait = 0; wait < 5000; wait++ )
>        {}
> 
> Second, the compiler might optimize this out to:
> 
>   int wait = 5000;

Shouldn't even do that -- in the new C++ spec (which gcc now supports),
variables defined inside of a for loop are local to that loop.  So 

    for (int wait = 0; wait < 5000; wait++) ;

    wait = 0;

should give you an error.

-- 
       Erik Max Francis, &tSftDotIotE / email / max AT alcyone DOT com
                     Alcyone Systems /   web / http://www.alcyone.com/max/
San Jose, California, United States /  icbm / 37 20 07 N  121 53 38 W
                                   \
                      "The future / is right there."
                                 / Bill Moyers

- Raw text -