April 17, 2026
2:44 p.m.
On Fri Apr 17 14:36:45 2026 +0000, Matteo Bruni wrote:
This (until the next patch) shadows the other `i` declaration above, which seems unintended. At some point (relatively soon) I'm going to have another loop in the same function which could use the same `i`, but doesn't have to. Do you prefer if I get rid of the earlier declaration at the top of the function or that I revert this one change? It doesn't matter much, I like the ability we have now to inline loop index declaration when they are only needed for the iteration but I don't really mind. It was mostly only to better show that code was indeed moved around in next patch.
-- https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/10689#note_136782