Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!van-bc!ubc-cs!alberta!mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA!Al_Dunbar
From: userAKDU@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (Al Dunbar)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Comparing strings...
Message-ID: <1717@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA>
Date: 18 Oct 90 04:27:05 GMT
References: <2205.271700c2@cc.nu.oz.au> <1990Oct13.190106.15615@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <10678.271ade27@amherst.bitnet>
Organization: MTS Univ of Alberta
Lines: 28

In article <10678.271ade27@amherst.bitnet>, twpierce@amherst.bitnet (Tim Pierce) writes:
>In article <1990Oct13.190106.15615@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>,
>gordon@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu (John Gordon) writes:
>
<<<deletions>>>
>>   for(i = 0; s1[i] && s2[i]; i++)
>>   {
>>     if(s1[i] > s2[i])
>>       return(S1_BIGGER);
>>     else if(s1[i] < s2[i])
>>       return(S2_BIGGER)
>>   }
>
>Correct me if I'm wrong here (being a C neophyte myself), but shouldn't you be
>using a while loop rather than a for loop? It looks to me as if this code will
>return only the relative sizes of the last characters in the string, not
>stopping once an inequality is hit. Or does the return() statement imply a
>break?
>
The return() statement (or just "return;") "implies a break"
in the same way that going outside implies that you have left
the room.
 
-------------------+-------------------------------------------
Al Dunbar          |
Edmonton, Alberta  |   this space for rent
CANADA             |
-------------------+-------------------------------------------
#! r