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 22:34:56 PST
Path: 
 supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!news.iac.net!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!europa.netcrusader.net!63.208.208.143!feed2.onemain.com!feed1.onemain.com!nntp1.onemain.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Mike Silva" <mjsilva@jps.net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
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$1@taliesin.netcom.net.uk>
Subject: Re: Problem trying to implement generics.
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Message-ID: <vE9D6.1002$lp4.397221@nntp1.onemain.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 22:34:16 -0700
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.239.210.151
X-Complaints-To: abuse@onemain.com
X-Trace: nntp1.onemain.com 987571867 209.239.210.151 (Wed,
 18 Apr 2001 01:31:07 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:31:07 EDT
Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:6964
Date: 2001-04-17T22:34:16-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Just to add another IMO, I've been writing (and debugging!!!) C for over 20
years, and C++ for almost half that time, and I think the for() loop version
below is just the kind of gimmick that can make C/C++ code so hard for a
programmer-reader to grasp, and if I came across it I'd be sorely tempted to
move the function calls (-especially- the assignment to X) out of the for()
for readability alone.

Mike

"Ayende Rahien" <Dont@spam.me> wrote in message
news:9bhoup$h9k$1@taliesin.netcom.net.uk...
>
> "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.
>
>
>