Well, we do have some requests...
To be fair, it also took me a while to be okay with 'newer' things like 'for (int i=0;'. But in the end, it's added to the standard for a good reason and I'm not sure if I even want to write anything for a non-C99-compliant compiler ever again (had some bad experience with the Rabbit CPU's 'almost-C') so I decided to just go with it. I can imagine that the culture in an entire company may be a bit slower to shift, though.
[Not a] Bugette in UART examples
Re: [Not a] Bugette in UART examples
Joking aside, I'm told that this would currently fail our Lint checking. But I do agree on "for (int i=": I once eschewed this practice but have since seen the light of limiting scope in this way. Maybe one day KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) will edge forward.
Re: [Not a] Bugette in UART examples
ouch.... I'm reading these posts >3 years into the future... and still feel the bite!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 255 guests