From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ad988eb0a9545c86
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-04-17 12:36:44 PST
Path: 
 supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.tele.dk!128.230.129.106!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!news.mindspring.net!not-for-mail
From: Larry Hazel <lhazel@mindspring.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Problem trying to implement generics.
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 14:32:08 -0500
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
Message-ID: <3ADC9A38.BE9BD8F6@mindspring.com>
References: <9b46dr$cd8$1@taliesin.netcom.net.uk>
 <PgmB6.11956$ix4.9222255@news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com>
 <9b6jtu$4is$2@taliesin.netcom.net.uk>
 <PDAB6.10174$FD1.1166748@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com>
 <9b6m27$68e$1@taliesin.netcom.net.uk>
 <0JBB6.10484$FD1.1197250@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com>
 <9b7tce$laf$2@taliesin.netcom.net.uk> <wccbsq0cslt.fsf@world.std.com>
 <3ADC4320.7ACA3DEC@averstar.com> <9bhoup$h9k$1@taliesin.netcom.net.uk>
 <3ADC7A79.8E853905@mindspring.com>
 <Pine.BSF.4.21.0104171057590.21817-100000@shell5.ba.best.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: c7.ae.9c.17
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Server-Date: 17 Apr 2001 19:32:05 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,x-ns11F8K63r3NhQ,x-ns2r2e09OnmPe2
Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:6953
Date: 2001-04-17T19:32:05+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

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