Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { })

bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:

On 22/04/2025 02:22, Keith Thompson wrote:

[...]

For example, in my post to which you replied, I discussed at
some length how I like to split for loops if they're too long.
You snipped that discussion *and then* insinuated that I don't care
about complex loops written on one line.  Please stop doing things
like that.

>
Well I care about it too, and I would write such things more sensibly
as well. But so what? Most code I see tends to be badly
formatted. For-headers are not split up unless they're long enough to
overflow the line.
>
It's something about the culture behind 'for' that encourages poor
coding style.

Did you miss my point, or did you deliberately ignore it?

You snipped part of my text in which I discussed how I like to split
long for loops.  You then insinuated that I personally don't care
about complex loops written on one line, after I clearly demonstrated
that I do, and you hid the evidence.

I'm asking you to stop doing that kind of thing.

I'm making a point, not about technical disagreements, but about you,
deliberately or otherwise, misrepresenting what I've written.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */