Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!gatech!emory!platt
From: platt@emory.uucp (Dan Platt)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Style [++i vs i++]
Message-ID: <2159@emory.uucp>
Date: Tue, 30-Jun-87 20:57:59 EDT
Article-I.D.: emory.2159
Posted: Tue Jun 30 20:57:59 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 1-Jul-87 07:22:15 EDT
References: <17310@amdcad.AMD.COM>
Reply-To: platt@emory.UUCP (Dan Platt)
Organization: Math & Computer Science, Emory University, Atlanta
Lines: 29

In article <17310@amdcad.AMD.COM> tim@amdcad.AMD.COM (Tim Olson) writes:
>OK, now that we have opened up the "style" issue with !p vs p != NULL (sic),
>how about another:
>
>Which operator (pre-increment or post-increment) do you use when the side-
>effect is the only desired action and the result is discarded, i.e.
>
>	for (i=0; i<MAX; ++i)
>vs
>	for (i=0; i<MAX; i++)
>or
>	++counter;	vs	counter++;
>
>Personally, the use of post-increment operators here drives me crazy. 


I prefer post-increment in these cases since 

		i++;
reminds me of
		i += 1;

which I find more agreeable.  Needless to say, most compilers
will handle the above the same way regardless of whether it was pre
or post incremented.  But then, this is all a matter of taste, and it's
a bad idea to call another person's spouse ugly.  Otherwise, it's
nice having them both around...

Dan