Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.lang.c > #393138
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) |
| Date | 2025-05-04 07:40 -0700 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <86cyco782p.fsf@linuxsc.com> (permalink) |
| References | (16 earlier) <vtj97r$1i3v3$1@dont-email.me> <vtl166$36p6b$1@dont-email.me> <vtlcg0$3f46a$2@dont-email.me> <20250415153419.00004cf7@yahoo.com> <vtlkpf$3mmqu$1@dont-email.me> |
Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes: > On 15/04/2025 13:34, Michael S wrote: > > <snip> > >> I suspect that 'while' loop is here in C because Dennis Ritchie wanted >> 'do .. while() ' and thought that if the keyword is here anyway than >> why not reuse it? >> In the hindsight, probably a mistake. > > In hindsight: > > $ find . -name \*.c | xargs cat | wc -l > 126343 > $ find . -name \*.c | xargs grep -w while | wc -l > 556 > $ find . -name \*.c | xargs grep -w for | wc -l > 1258 > > > So although I use for() about twice as much as I use while(), I still > find while a better option one time in three. That's useful enough to > make it worth keeping in the toolbox. Out of curiousity, I tabulated a similar set of statistics for a recent C project. Considering just the three iteration control structures (do/for/while), the results (rounded to the nearest 0.1 percent) were while 56.1 % for 24.1 % do/while 19.5 %
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next | Find similar
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-04 07:40 -0700
csiph-web