Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!dino!news.iastate.edu!IASTATE.EDU!john
From: john@IASTATE.EDU (Hascall John Paul)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: a style question
Message-ID: <1990Oct2.192727@IASTATE.EDU>
Date: 3 Oct 90 00:27:27 GMT
References: <7341@darkstar.ucsc.edu> <1990Sep30.050655.13212@zoo.toronto.edu> <1990Sep30.172917.2951@Neon.Stanford.EDU> <DAVIS.90Oct1025438@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu> <1990Oct1.174941.22195@zoo.toronto.edu> <18370@haddock.ima.isc.com>
Sender: usenet@news.iastate.edu (USENET News Poster)
Reply-To: john@IASTATE.EDU (Hascall John Paul)
Organization: Iowa State University
Lines: 23


In article <18370@haddock.ima.isc.com>, karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer)
writes:
 
> Note that with either Henry's example or mine you will lose big if x is an
> unsigned integer (and if you don't use lint to catch it).  I usually use
> 	for (x = 100; x != 0; --x)
> on unsigned countdown loops where the index doesn't matter (i.e. just "do 100
> times"); if you actually need the interval [0,100),
> 	for (x = 100; x-- != 0;)
> does the job (though probably less efficiently).

     I suppose this is so hideous that I shall be cursed forever for it...  ;-)

        unsigned int   x;

        for (x = 100; (int)--x > 0; )

--
John Hascall                        An ill-chosen word is the fool's messenger.
Project Vincent
Iowa State University Computation Center                       john@iastate.edu
Ames, IA  50010                                                  (515) 294-9551