Re: Problem trying to implement generics.

[Larry Hazel <lhazel@mindspring.com>]

Brian Rogoff wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Larry Hazel wrote:
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > "Tucker Taft" <stt@averstar.com> wrote in message
> > > news:3ADC4320.7ACA3DEC@averstar.com...
> > >
> > > > Interestingly enough, the standard Iterator in Java
> > > > uses:
> > > >      while (Iter.hasNext()) {
> > > >          X = Iter.next();
> > > >          ...
> > > >      }
> > > >
> > > > even though Java has functions with side effects (although
> > > > in fact, only with side-effects on by-reference operands,
> > > > since it has no parameter modes at all!).
> > >
> > > Why use it like this?
> > > for (;Iter.hasNext(); X = Iter.next() ){
> > >     //do stuff
> > > }
> > >
> > > Is much more readable, IMO.
> >
> > I disagree.  The C style for loop is totally unreadable garbage IMO.
> 
> Well, to a C programmer the for loop is perfectly readable. As someone
> familiar with C, Java, Ada, and a few other languages, I have to say that
> I found Tucker's original expression far preferable to Ayende's,
> though I'd prefer "hasMore" to "hasNext" :-). Ayende, why do you find the
> for loop preferable in this case?
> 
> As long as we're considering iterators, it should be mentioned that
> iterators are one of the great examples for adding downward funargs into
> the language.
> 
> > In what little C programming I have done, I refused to use for loops.
> 
> Did you use macros to set { and } to BEGIN and END too?
> 
I thought about it, but just commented the } instead.

Larry