Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: selection-sort in C |
| Date | 2011-08-17 10:10 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <9b087fFgq5U7@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | <4e4a4fc9$0$313$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <871uwlk39e.fsf@bazspaz.fatphil.org> <j2eof6$pgl$1@news.albasani.net> |
On 08/17/11 09:41 AM, BGB wrote:
> On 8/16/2011 4:24 AM, Phil Carmody wrote:
>> arnuld<sunrise@invalid.address> writes:
>>>
>>> void selectionSort(char s[], int len)
>>> {
>>> int i, idx;
>>> char tmp;
>>
>> Schools of thought vary, but some prefer variables that are only
>> going to be used in a small scope to be declared within that scope.
>>
>>> for(i = 0; i != len; ++i)
>>> {
>>> idx = findSmallest(s, i, len);
>>
>> so that could be
>> int idx = findSmallest(s, i, len);
>>
>
> however, this will not work on compilers which don't support C99, where
> declarations have to be at the start of a block and can only be
> initialized to compile-time constants.
Not so, the above is perfectly legal old C. You are confusing file
scoped and function scoped variables, where the same rules apply to both
old C and C99.
>>> /* printf("i = %d, Smallest Index = %d, s[%d] = %c\n", i, idx,
>>> idx, s[idx]); */
>>> tmp = s[i];
>>
>> and that could be
>> char tmp = s[i];
>>
>
> same issue...
Same non-issue!
--
Ian Collins
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
selection-sort in C arnuld <sunrise@invalid.address> - 2011-08-16 11:08 +0000
Re: selection-sort in C Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-08-16 14:24 +0300
Re: selection-sort in C arnuld <sunrise@invalid.address> - 2011-08-16 11:36 +0000
Re: selection-sort in C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-08-16 13:22 +0100
Re: selection-sort in C arnuld <sunrise@invalid.address> - 2011-08-16 13:44 +0000
Re: selection-sort in C Anand Hariharan <mailto.anand.hariharan@gmail.com> - 2011-08-16 07:36 -0700
Re: selection-sort in C Thomas Boell <tboell@domain.invalid> - 2011-08-16 18:03 +0200
Re: selection-sort in C karnath <karnathtorjian@gmail.com> - 2011-08-16 16:25 +0000
Re: selection-sort in C Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-08-16 16:33 +0000
Re: selection-sort in C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-08-16 20:03 +0100
Re: selection-sort in C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-16 09:27 -0700
Re: selection-sort in C Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2011-08-17 20:17 +0000
Re: selection-sort in C pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2011-08-18 00:41 -0400
Re: selection-sort in C Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2011-08-17 21:52 -0700
Re: selection-sort in C pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2011-08-18 01:07 -0400
Re: selection-sort in C blp@cs.stanford.edu (Ben Pfaff) - 2011-08-17 22:36 -0700
Re: selection-sort in C pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2011-08-18 07:00 -0400
Re: selection-sort in C BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-16 14:41 -0700
Re: selection-sort in C Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-17 10:10 +1200
Re: selection-sort in C BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-16 17:25 -0700
Re: selection-sort in C pacman@kosh.dhis.org (Alan Curry) - 2011-08-17 01:53 +0000
Re: selection-sort in C Gene <gene.ressler@gmail.com> - 2011-08-16 05:27 -0700
Re: selection-sort in C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-08-16 07:24 -0700
Re: selection-sort in C pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2011-08-16 19:22 -0400
Re: selection-sort in C arnuld <sunrise@invalid.address> - 2011-08-17 07:52 +0000
Re: selection-sort in C Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-08-17 10:15 +0000
Re: selection-sort in C Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-08-17 13:22 +0300
Re: selection-sort in C pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2011-08-18 00:33 -0400
csiph-web