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

On 20.04.2025 21:51, bart wrote:

On 20/04/2025 17:46, Janis Papanagnou wrote:

On 20.04.2025 13:43, bart wrote:

On 20/04/2025 11:18, Janis Papanagnou wrote:

On 19.04.2025 15:05, bart wrote:

>
But overloading in the form of 30-40 integer types to represent the 8
types i8-i64 and u8-u64, plus the 16 different combinations of writing
'unsigned long long int', and so on, is fine. As are the dozens
(hundreds?) of macros in stdint.h/inttypes.h.

>
I haven't said this "is fine". It wasn't at all the topic here.

 
Sorry, I forgot the rules. [...]

What rules? You're again making up things. - Instead of arguing on
the topic you switched to something else that you dislike about "C".

 
In C? I don't recall any examples in C that could be written without 'for'.

(We've obviously been speaking about different things.)

 

It makes not much sense to spread them across a multi-line block
of statements. - If you haven't ever experienced that, and still
cannot see and understand that if explained to you, then I can't
help you.[*]

 
Here's the example you snipped:
 
    for(p=sqliteHashFirst(&pSchema->trigHash); p; p=sqliteHashNext(p)){
        sqlite3DeleteTrigger(db, (Trigger*)sqliteHashData(p));
    }
 
In my opinion, that for-header is too complex. You can barely make out
the condition (that lonely 'p' which you have to hunt for).

You find (and can make up) arbitrary examples of badly written code.

How is that 'for' loop with all in one line worse than the respective
'while' loop if stupidly written in one line.

If you have complex expressions you format it accordingly. Moreover,
you choose appropriate names for your variables and functions.

 

The point is that if you have programming elements that are
related to a loop construct (initialization, exit condition,
update for next iteration) it makes sense to keep them together.

 
So what about this then (another example you snipped):
 
 for(p=sqliteHashFirst(&pSchema->trigHash); p; sqlite3DeleteTrigger(db,
(Trigger*)sqliteHashData(p)), p=sqliteHashNext(p));
 
It keeps it even more together, which you seem to like.

You are talking nonsense. Again; how is that better than a 'while'
loop where everything is on one line. - Are you deliberately playing
the stupid?

To keep things together means that you have the controlling elements
together. To not have parts of the controlling elements at the very
end of the block that the control construct controls.

(From the other posts I see that the folks here understand that; so
why are you playing the stupid?)

[...]

 
I think it is YOU whose brain is so bound to having just the ONE kind of
loop to do half a dozen different jobs, none of them well.

(I didn't say that. - Stop such misinterpretations and imputations!)

[...]
 

Why do you again make
up things. - The point is to keep things together that belong
together.

 
Why are you so crazy about putting everything onto one line? [...]

(I haven't said that. - Stop it!)

You're
saying that:
 
   ONE; TWO; THREE
 
is always better than:
 
   ONE;
   TWO;
   THREE;

(No I haven't said that. - Stop it!)

[...]
 
This is an example which I started off trying to simplify:
 
 for (monthIdx = 0; monthIdx < 12 && yearDay >=
yearDays[leapYear][monthIdx]; monthIdx++) ;
 
I simply can't see it.

You can simply (and obviously) format it appropriately...

   for (monthIdx = 0;
        monthIdx < 12  &&  yearDay >= yearDays[leapYear][monthIdx];
        monthIdx++)
       ;

So the first step is to turn it into a while loop:

Why? It's completely unnecessary to _rewrite_ that. A _reformat_ is
not only simpler (and safer to do), it's the straightforward way.

And if it still appears too complicated a style for your perception
(or liking) you can also keep the 'for' loop just iterating over the
'monthIdx' and put the exit condition explicitly in the controlled
block with a 'break' if you prefer that.

   for (monthIdx = 0;  monthIdx < 12;  monthIdx++)
       if (yearDay < yearDays[leapYear][monthIdx])
           break;

Both presented forms are IMO much better structured (and most easily
recognizable) than your code following here...

 
   monthIdx = 0;
   while (monthIdx < 12 && yearDay >= yearDays[leapYear][monthIdx])
      monthIdx++;
 
Now at least I can see the condition! I'm sorry, but if prefer the
original, then I don't want to have to debug or maintain your code.

(Above "the original" was the 'for' loop.)

[...]
 
I just don't get the love. Or maybe, nobody here (perhaps apart from
Keith) is willing to admit that there's anything wrong with 'for'.

You don't like it. Fine. (I don't like a lot about "C".) Who cares?

Janis

[...]