Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { })
Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 07:31:11 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <86h62078i8.fsf@linuxsc.com>
References: <vspbjh$8dvd$1@dont-email.me> <vtba81$1qfbm$1@dont-email.me> <vtbc6o$1te2o$1@dont-email.me> <vtbhjv$24api$1@dont-email.me> <vtbn2k$293r1$1@dont-email.me> <vtc19j$2kqlj$1@dont-email.me> <87a58mqt2o.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vtc7mp$2q5hr$1@dont-email.me> <vtcqf6$3j95s$1@dont-email.me> <vtdh4q$b3kt$1@dont-email.me> <vtf7fe$1qtpg$1@dont-email.me> <vtgfuf$31ug1$1@dont-email.me> <20250413072027.219@kylheku.com> <vtgpce$39229$1@dont-email.me> <vti2ki$g23v$1@dont-email.me> <vtin99$vu24$1@dont-email.me> <vtiuf0$18au8$1@dont-email.me> <vtj97r$1i3v3$1@dont-email.me> <vtl166$36p6b$1@dont-email.me> <vtlcg0$3f46a$2@dont-email.me> <20250415153419.00004cf7@yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 16:31:12 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f2e2a4892b4200c8deca4768c4473856"; logging-data="2179137"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19yQTuU+1DOjJkiGI3ibk72TliAMql/QGk="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:kFR6a7HCzIIYIQDzdxleqJrA5e4= sha1:o0qKI4N9VDshNL1RV/Fvy2AGrCo=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:393137

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:

> On Tue, 15 Apr 2025 11:30:24 +0100
> bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>
>> Let me ask you this:  what exactly is the point of the 'while'
>> statement in C?  Since it can always be trivially be written as:
>>
>>     for (;cond;)
>>
>> It seems to that most use cases (initialise, check exit condition,
>> change something that affects the letter), would suit 'for' better.
>>
>> But since 'for' then becomes overloaded, there ought to be a
>> dedicated feature for simple iteration.  So it seems the solution is
>> as a I suggested above.
>
> 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?

According to K&R, all of the basic control structures in C -- if,
while, for, do, and switch (and listed in that order) -- were
provided in BCPL, though not using the same syntax as in C,.

> In the hindsight, probably a mistake.

I admit I don't understand this reaction.