Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- From: "Charlie Gordon" <news@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 03:49:43 +0200
"Chris McDonald" <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:detv2b$ael$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Ben Pfaff <blp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> I would suggest that both while(1) and for(;;) are potentially unclear
> to a person (undergrad. student) seeing C for the first time
> (while assuming they haven't seen Java or C++, either).
>
> OK, I suggest that while(true) is *clearer*.
BS
why not use the real clear thing :
WHILE (TRUE) {
}
or even
WHILE (TRUE == TRUE)
BEGIN
...
END
with obvious macro definitions for dummies ;-)
--
Chqrlie.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- From: Chris McDonald
- Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- From: akarl
- Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- References:
- while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- From: Michael B Allen
- Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- From: Chris McDonald
- Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- From: Ben Pfaff
- Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- From: Chris McDonald
- while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- Prev by Date: Re: Style isn't always religious
- Next by Date: Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- Previous by thread: Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- Next by thread: Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
