Re: [XEN PATCH 02/11] x86: move declarations to address MISRA C:2012 Rule 2.1

[Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> > > This pattern (two closing braces at the same level) is why switch 
> > > scope
> > > variable declarations were introduced (at least as far as 
> > > introductions
> > > by me go). If switch scope variables aren't okay (which I continue to
> > > consider questionable), then this stylistic aspect needs sorting 
> > > first
> > > (if everyone else thinks the above style is okay - with the missing
> > > blank line inserted -, then so be it).
> > Actually, they can be deviated because they don't result in wrong code
> > being generated.
> Only later I recalled Andrew's intention to possibly make use of
> -ftrivial-auto-var-init. While, unlike I think he said, such declared
> variables aren't getting in the way of this (neither gcc nor clang
> warn about them), they also don't benefit from it (i.e. they'll be
> left uninitialized despite the command line option saying otherwise).
> IOW I think further consideration is going to be needed here.
>
> Jan
Well, in that case I'm happy if I can contribute in some way to the 
discussion, but
perhaps this is best sorted out in a separate discussion, so that later 
I can send a v2
reflecting the decision(s).

--
Nicola Vetrini, BSc
Software Engineer, BUGSENG srl (https://bugseng.com)