[Xcb] [PATCH] Rename index to idx to avoid shadowing

[Barton C Massey]

I'm fine with these patches, but in general I'm quite
ambivalent about eliminating shadowing; the point of
static scoping, to some extent, is to make shadowing
OK.  Do others on this list have an opinion?

	Bart

In message <1219838188-8908-5-git-send-email-julien at danjou.info> you wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Julien Danjou <julien at danjou.info>
> ---
>  src/xcb_ext.c |    8 ++++----
>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/src/xcb_ext.c b/src/xcb_ext.c
> index 12cb164..68bb29b 100644
> --- a/src/xcb_ext.c
> +++ b/src/xcb_ext.c
> @@ -40,11 +40,11 @@ typedef struct lazyreply {
>      } value;
>  } lazyreply;
>  
> -static lazyreply *get_index(xcb_connection_t *c, int index)
> +static lazyreply *get_index(xcb_connection_t *c, int idx)
>  {
> -    if(index > c->ext.extensions_size)
> +    if(idx > c->ext.extensions_size)
>      {
> -        int new_size = index << 1;
> +        int new_size = idx << 1;
>          lazyreply *new_extensions = realloc(c->ext.extensions, sizeof(lazyreply) * new_size);
>          if(!new_extensions)
>              return 0;
> @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ static lazyreply *get_index(xcb_connection_t *c, int index)
>          c->ext.extensions = new_extensions;
>          c->ext.extensions_size = new_size;
>      }
> -    return c->ext.extensions + index - 1;
> +    return c->ext.extensions + idx - 1;
>  }
>  
>  static lazyreply *get_lazyreply(xcb_connection_t *c, xcb_extension_t *ext)
> -- 
> 1.5.6.3
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xcb mailing list
> Xcb at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xcb