On s=F6n, 2007-03-04 at 13:55 +0100, Thomas Anders wrote:
> Magnus Fromreide wrote:
> > Are patches like the attached ones of interest for the project or should
> > I just ignore such things when I see them?

> =

> Cleanup is always appreciated.
> =

> > The advantage of the patches is that they make the code more local so
> > you do not have to keep track of lots of function scope variables, see
> > for instance make-zone-local where there are two uses of the variable,
> > 25 and 50 lines from the declaration or make-len-local where the use is
> > 90 lines from the declaration.
> > =

> > make-len-local
> > Move the len variable from function scope to the scope of the if
> > clause where it i used.
> > =

> > make-zone-local
> > Move the zone variable from function scopes of the two if
> > clauses where it is used.

> =

> Don't these two patches introduce potential problems with C89 compilers?


In both cases the declarations is at the start of a block, and as far as
I know it have always been valid to declare variables at the start of a
block, even if it is an inner block.

> > remove-unused-variable
> > Removes the unused variable sinkport
> > Makes the indentation of the *st variable consistent with the
> > *sp variable above it. (Possibly the declarations of those two
> > should be folded together, if so then that is for a later
> > patch)

> =

> Looks good to me.

So I should clean it up and submit it as a patch?


Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
Net-snmp-coders mailing list