<html>
    <head>
      <base href="http://llvm.org/bugs/" />
    </head>
    <body><span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:jonathan.sauer@gmx.de" title="jonathan.sauer@gmx.de">jonathan.sauer@gmx.de</a>
</span> changed
              <a class="bz_bug_link 
          bz_status_RESOLVED  bz_closed"
   title="RESOLVED WORKSFORME - clang: Re-declaration of a local variable inside a for-loop is allowed"
   href="http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18787">bug 18787</a>
        <br>
             <table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="8">
          <tr>
            <th>What</th>
            <th>Removed</th>
            <th>Added</th>
          </tr>

         <tr>
           <td style="text-align:right;">Status</td>
           <td>NEW
           </td>
           <td>RESOLVED
           </td>
         </tr>

         <tr>
           <td style="text-align:right;">CC</td>
           <td>
                
           </td>
           <td>jonathan.sauer@gmx.de
           </td>
         </tr>

         <tr>
           <td style="text-align:right;">Resolution</td>
           <td>---
           </td>
           <td>WORKSFORME
           </td>
         </tr></table>
      <p>
        <div>
            <b><a class="bz_bug_link 
          bz_status_RESOLVED  bz_closed"
   title="RESOLVED WORKSFORME - clang: Re-declaration of a local variable inside a for-loop is allowed"
   href="http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18787#c4">Comment # 4</a>
              on <a class="bz_bug_link 
          bz_status_RESOLVED  bz_closed"
   title="RESOLVED WORKSFORME - clang: Re-declaration of a local variable inside a for-loop is allowed"
   href="http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18787">bug 18787</a>
              from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:jonathan.sauer@gmx.de" title="jonathan.sauer@gmx.de">jonathan.sauer@gmx.de</a>
</span></b>
        <pre>gcc 4.2.1 doesn't complain when specifying C99 as the standard (-std=c99). In
C89 (-std=c89) it (correctly) complains about "redeclaration of ā€˜iā€™ with no
linkage", because in C89 the definitions in the first clause of a for statement
are in the surrounding scope instead of the loop body's scope.

clang also complains when using C89:

% ~/LLVM/build/Release+Asserts/bin/clang -std=c89 clang.c
clang.c:5:14: error: redefinition of 'i'
    for (int i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { }
             ^
clang.c:3:9: note: previous definition is here
    int i;
        ^
1 error generated.


I guess gcc and clang use different C standards as default, which is why you
got the differing results.</pre>
        </div>
      </p>
      <hr>
      <span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
      
      <ul>
          <li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li>
      </ul>
    </body>
</html>