make VS2010 happy

[ssrlive]

make VS2010 happy

[msftclas]

All CLA requirements met.

[clzls]

It may be the same idea of #158 . Either we remove all 'for' loop initial declarations, etc. to fit ISO C90/GNU C90 or lower versions, or we choose to adopt C99 standard and not to satisfy VS2010.

[ssrlive]

I think my commits fit ISO C90.

[clzls]

@ssrlive , I mean that we should decide whether to fit C90 or send it to the trash and adopt C99.
In C99, for(int i = 1;... is accepted while in C90 not. If we adopt C99, we do not need these commits (maybe the whole PR) any more.

And I may call @craigwi to help us.

[ssrlive]

I think it's easy to make the decision. because the code base will not change many and supporting more compilers is a good idea.

[craigwi]

This PR is also similar to #59. The current thinking is that the master branch is compiled using one of two toolsets: VS2017 and mingw.

Right now, it would be easy to make VS2010 work, but the question is whether going forward we support VS2010 indefinitely.

I agree with a comment @leeter made in #9 and elsewhere: let's stick with modern compilers to get the best code generation, optimization and security features.

Other comments?

[clzls]

I second the motion. We should send C90, MinGW 3.x, VS2010s into the trash.
(But I cannot compile it in my VS2017 Community. I bumped into "internal errors" in BagOValues.h)

[leeter]

@craigwi I wasn't planning on commenting on this but if you're going to go this route you should consider removing the dependency on undocumented apis for formatting and copying volumes and switch to WMI to manage that depending on what OSs you still want to support. The storage management classes are the official way to do these things in windows 8 and beyond.

[ssrlive]

I have finished the work for Windows XP and VS2010. https://github.com/ssrlive/winfile/tree/winxp
Bye bye.

[clzls]

@ssrlive , WinXP support is in retro brunch. Thank you anyway.
Maybe you should read #88 before you start working. See you next time.