[compile] fix non-c99 regression in for() loop - #538
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
|
Does your compiler support c99? I was considering converting the entire src/ directory to c99, but I have no stats on what compilers people use. |
Contributor
|
Looks good for now. Let's use #539 for any discussion about the future. |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
A recent commit 774570f introduced a compilation regression when compiling
libfreenectandfakenectspecifically on EL6 platforms, where it previously did not exist due to the introducedfor(int i ..)declaration, which is also inconsistent with the rest of the code:So this simple one-liner makes it all happy again.