Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!bellcore!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!nosun!qiclab!m2xenix!puddle!p0.f4.n494.z5.fidonet.org!cspw.quagga
From: cspw.quagga@p0.f4.n494.z5.fidonet.org (cspw quagga)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.modula2
Subject: Re: Why are the loops so awkward?
Message-ID: <5759.2677DF35@puddle.fidonet.org>
Date: 15 Jun 90 00:07:42 GMT
Sender: ufgate@puddle.fidonet.org (newsout1.26)
Organization: FidoNet node 5:494/4.0 - Settler City Fido, Grahamstown RSA
Lines: 32


 
There have been a number of suggestions that my awkward problem
of processing every element in a string should be coded
like this
    i := 0;
    WHILE (i < Length(s)) DO
       process(S[i]);
       INC(i);
    END;
 
Although this works nicely, it violates all the ideas that one
should distinguish between definite loops (where the number of iterations
is known in advance, and a FOR loop is the most appropriate
construct), and an indefinite loop where one iterates until or while
the conditions have not been fulfilled.  So although this loop
satifies the problem, imho it is stylistically bad.
 
Pete
 
 
--
EP Wentworth - Dept. of Computer Science - Rhodes University - Grahamstown.
Internet: cspw.quagga@f4.n494.z5.fidonet.org
Uninet: cspw@quagga
uucp: ..uunet!m2xenix!quagga!cspw



--  
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!5!494!4.0!cspw.quagga
Internet: cspw.quagga@p0.f4.n494.z5.fidonet.org