Re: Problem trying to implement generics.

[Brian Rogoff <bpr@shell5.ba.best.com>]

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? 

> Of course, I also refused to use ++, --, +=, and all the other
> wierd C operators.  Matter of taste, I guess.

Indeed, some people have a problem adapting to the features of other
languages. 

-- Brian