[GuB-42]

Looking at the source, yeah, you are totally right. I was just looking at the lines out of context.

I was just thinking of cases where atoi(argv[++i]) was justified. Turns out I was overthinking it, it is just terrible code. No feedback on error, crash when the last argument is missing a parameter, static array with no bounds checking, a potentially leaky strdup. Comments are the least of the problems. It is a code smell though. A well justified one in that case.

[mannykannot]

I have to admit that until seeing this example, I thought that code commented this way did not actually exist, and that the possibility of it was just a straw man invented for the sake of argument!