Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #6782
| From | Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 |
| References | <list-20110802003845@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <8djj37pg6o35jb1b8lskefb4jmb2iadmbe@4ax.com> |
| Message-ID | <7cl_p.425844$lW4.338969@newsfe07.iad> (permalink) |
| Organization | Public Usenet Newsgroup Access |
| Date | 2011-08-03 20:53 -0300 |
On 11-08-03 07:40 PM, Roedy Green wrote:
> On 1 Aug 2011 22:45:41 GMT, ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote,
> quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>> for( int i = 1; i < l.size(); ++i ){ final E e = l.get( 0 ); ... }
>
> This one is clearer. The problem is most people will just glance at it
> and read it as for( int i=0; i<l.zise(); i++ )
Errr, I don't know if "most" people would misread the above, although no
doubt some would, but how can you assert that something is more clear
then immediately assert that most people will mis-read it?
> I think you mean i++ not ++i.
In this particular case why would it matter? Write a simple test case
that has 2 loops, one using pre-increment for the increment expression,
one using post-increment, and see if there's a difference. There won't
be: the increment expression is invoked *after* each iteration through
the loop.
> you might use for ( E e : l )
> Then use logic to avoid the first elt, though that is overkill for
> ensuring noone misreads your code.
AHS
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-08-03 15:40 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-08-03 20:53 -0300
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-08-03 21:10 -0400
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-08-03 21:22 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-08-03 23:36 -0400
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 RedGrittyBrick <RedGrittyBrick@spamweary.invalid> - 2011-08-04 09:37 +0100
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Chris Riesbeck <Chris.Riesbeck@gmail.com> - 2011-08-04 12:47 -0500
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 markspace <-@.> - 2011-08-04 11:27 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-08-04 13:58 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 markspace <-@.> - 2011-08-04 14:36 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-08-04 14:46 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 RedGrittyBrick <RedGrittyBrick@spamweary.invalid> - 2011-08-05 10:09 +0100
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-08-05 14:46 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-08-04 20:51 -0400
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Tim Slattery <Slattery_T@bls.gov> - 2011-08-05 08:38 -0400
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-08-05 10:22 +0000
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-08-10 09:05 -0700
csiph-web