-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 207
WIP: slightly improve substitutions #562
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Draft
carenas
wants to merge
1
commit into
PCRE2Project:master
Choose a base branch
from
carenas:btersub
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Draft
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Personally, I'm very happy with these changes.
I know Philip likes the old style of defining variables high up, at the top of a scope, and with a blank line after variable definitions.
But I don't see any benefit to having variables available for use, but not yet initialised. Much better to define & initialise at the same time (safer).
The compiler will hoist all the variables up to the top anyway (it will bump the stack pointer just once at the start of a block, rather than bump the stack pointer multiple times, when it sees a new variable).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Partly it's because I'm a dinosaur from the age when one had to define variables like that, but partly also I find it makes it easier when looking back up some code to find where a variable is defined. However, I am not going to try to impose my own preferences on the future. I can certainly see the advantage of always initializing at definition time. So please don't worry about me too much.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Funny is that this change is still valid C89 code and the main motivation wasn't to go against Philip's advice of defining variables at the beginning of blocks, but just reducing the scope of this variable to where it was actually needed/used.
Since we have at least one CI job with
-Wshadow
and I wanted to minimize churn didn't rename the variable to reflect its "temp" holder (might be even optimized out) status.