#165 C99 compliance: for (int i=0; ...

[Philipp Klaus Krause]

At
http://sdcc.sourceforge.net/doc/sdccman.html/node171.html
you mention
for (int i=0; i<10; i++) /* is invalid in SDCC although
allowed in C99 */

I'd like to see this implemented.

[Philipp Klaus Krause]

[#384] and [#445] are duplictaes of this one.

Philipp

[Philipp Klaus Krause]

A tricky bit is that we need another block in between the outer one and the loop body.
I.e the following is ok, ad neither the outer or the inner variable i is in conflict with the variable i declared i the for.

void f(void)
{
    int i;
    for(int i = 4; i < 8; i++)
    {
        int i;
        j++;
    }
}

Philipp

[Philipp Klaus Krause]

Implemented in revision #9724.

Philipp

[Diego Herranz]

Thanks, Phillip, for this!

I've just noticed that in the documentation, many double dashes (e.g. --stc-cXX) have been replaced by a single long one (e.g. –std-cXX)? 

Cheers,
Diego

[Philipp Klaus Krause]

I still see the double dashes ins ections 3.1 and 3.3 where do you see the single long one?

Philipp

[Diego Herranz]

https://sourceforge.net/p/sdcc/code/9724/tree/trunk/sdcc/doc/sdccman.lyx?diff=513f4d42271846342871488b:9723&diformat=sidebyside

Around line 2500 for example.

Diego

[Philipp Klaus Krause]

Lyx did that automatically. But it soesn't change the .pdf. AFAIK -- is just notation for a single longunderscore, so wherever -- got changed to – in the source,it alread was – in the .pdf. Might make sense to check all places where the code changed from -- to see if they should have been escaped (or used code mode) instead.

Philipp

[Diego Herranz]

You're right. They showed up as long dashes already on the PDF. Anyway, I've seen you've fixed it already.

Thanks!