From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <fcb1fb436756a878833fc14876365542@9netics.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] A Plan 9 C request....
Date: Wed,  1 Mar 2006 10:31:51 -0800
From: Skip Tavakkolian <9nut@9netics.com>
In-Reply-To: <512d50b944dded9e4273ce3d066f52b7@swtch.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 087cabb4-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++); }

i didn't know. wow?!
my vc6 is officially an antique.