Function declarations (style)

[Chris Torek]

In article <11879 at iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> bobmon at iuvax.cs.indiana.edu
(RAMontante) writes:
>... somewhat as follows:
>x() { static z(); z(); }
>y() { static z(); z(); }
>static z() { ; }
>
>(MSC apparently chokes; BTW, TurboC accepts it.)  My question is... Why
>declare z() inside the functions x() and y()? ... declaring static z()
>prior to and outside of both x() and y() ... seems like the only natural
>thing to do.

Why do some people like a certain 181-novel 1930s and 1940s SF pulp
series?  The only answer is `style':  Some people just do.  (Incidentally,
with the publication of `In Hell, Madonna' as `The Red Spider', now there
are 182.)

(Now I wonder how many people will recognise the series named above...)
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163)
Domain:	chris at mimsy.umd.edu	Path:	uunet!mimsy!chris