On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 05:18:18PM -0700, Christopher Li wrote: > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Luc Van Oostenryck > <luc.vanoostenryck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The for-statement needs a lot of fields in struct statement, much > > more than any other statement. This is due to the complexity of > > the for-statement. > > > > However part of this complexity can be removed by processing the > > 'pre-' statement separately from the loop. This is equivalent to > > transform a single-statement for-loop like: > > for (pre; cond; post) > > body > > into a compound statement like: > > pre; > > for (;cond; post) > > body; > > Notice that the two are not exactly the same. > > quote 6.8.5 3"The declaration part of a for statement shall only > declare identifiers for > objects having storage class auto or register." > > However sparse already validate the for statement declaration in function > "validate_for_loop_decl()" so I think it is fine. Yes, and the patch take care of the scope too. -- Luc -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
