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

Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> writes:

On 2025-04-16, James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:

[...]

The key to using the for() statement is to make sure the three
expressions are related appropriately.

>
The observation is valid that the three expressions often fall into a
pattern by which they can be condensed.
>
  for (var = from; var < to; var++)
>
can be expressed by a construct which mentions var ony once,
and omits the operators.
>
You can obtain this with the preprocessor and be reasonably happy.

Sure, you *can*, but I wouldn't.

For me the raw C-style for loop is clear enough.

I could write a macro like:

#define ITERATE(var, from, to) for ((var) = (from); (var) < (to); (var)++)

but then anyone reading the code has to understand both how C-style
for loops work and how the ITERATE macro works.  Does the expansion
use < or <=?  What happens if "to" is INT_MAX?  Did the author of
the macro get everything right?

Now if someone else finds that such a macro makes things easier for
them, that's fine.  But often, *in my opinion*, such macros make code
harder to read for someone who knows C well.

[...]

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