From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <512d50b944dded9e4273ce3d066f52b7@swtch.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] A Plan 9 C request....
From: "Russ Cox" <rsc@swtch.com>
Date: Wed,  1 Mar 2006 13:20:00 -0500
In-Reply-To: <61438dea6b0a264f8225382d0c6e2d51@9netics.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 084240be-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> when it was added to C++, i "felt" that the scope
> of 'i' wasn't natural; it goes beyond 'for's closure.
> i like a behavior like this:
>
> 	{ int i; for (i = 0, ...) ...; }

so did the c++ standards committee and the c99 committee.
both have declared that

	for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++);

now means

	{ int i; for(i=0; i<10; i++); }

russ