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

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 14:09:44 GMT
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>

bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>

On 15/04/2025 20:07, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>

bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>

On 15/04/2025 14:19, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>
Thats's fine.  But it means a real 'for' loop doesn't exist in C;
you have to emulate it using that 3-way construct, which is naff,
and also error prone.

>
Real for loops _are_ a three-way construct.
>
135 FOR I=1 TO 10 STEP 2                              [BASIC]
>
     for(i = 1; i < 11; i += 2)                        [C/C++]
>
     do 1 = 1, 10, 2                                   [FORTRAN]

>
Any step other than 1 is unusual.  So Basic and Fortran would
typically be:
>
    for i = 1 to 10     # 6 tokens;  Basic
    do  i = 1, 10       # 6 tokens;  Fortran
    for i = 1, 10       # 6 tokens;  Lua
    for i to 10 do      # 5 tokens;  Mine (using default start)
    to 10 do            # 3 tokens;  Mine (when index is not needed)
>
Let's look at that C again:
>
    for (int i = 1; i < 11; i += 1)  # 15 tokens;  C

>
  for(i = 1; i++ <= 10;)

>
I'd reject this code during review.
Hopefully, you too.

I'm curious to know the basis for your reaction.  What about the
code would prompt your judgment to reject it?  Is it just a
specific reaction, or does it represent some more general pattern
(and if so then what more general pattern)?