Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!sq!msb
From: msb@sq.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: for vs. while (was: Re: documentation standards........)
Message-ID: <1987Oct25.234440.16608@sq.uucp>
Date: Sun, 25-Oct-87 23:44:40 EST
Article-I.D.: sq.1987Oct25.234440.16608
Posted: Sun Oct 25 23:44:40 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 27-Oct-87 05:28:45 EST
Reply-To: msb@sq.UUCP (Mark Brader)
Followup-To: poster
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto
Lines: 25
Checksum: 35554

I argued that
> >       for (iterations = 0; upper - lower > epsilon; iterations++)
was more C-style than the corresponding while-form.

Chip Salzenburg (chip@ateng.UUCP) replied:
> It is _not_ true that a "C programmer" will use a "for" loop whenever
> possible.  For example, I consider myself a fairly experienced C
> programmer, and my personal rule is that only variables involved in loop
> _control_ should appear in the for statement.

I would amend this to "involved WITH loop control".  If "iterations" was
some variable that is also being modified throughout inside the loop,
then I would probably prefer the while form.  But here it is a simple
counter of the number of times the loop runs, which is more closely
involved with loop control than with the loop body.

It is a fairly fine point, until the loop body gets large enough that
the iteration++ moves out of sight of the iteration=0.  (Of course, 
depending on the use of break, one may be able to put the iteration++
at the TOP of the loop body, which is okay.)   Anyway, further discussion
on this should probably be by mail (so I'm putting "Followup-To: poster"
in the header; override if you wish).

Mark Brader		"We did not try to keep writing until things got full."
utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com					-- Ritchie