Why is for(int i=0; i < 100; ++i) poor?

[Old Wolf]

As noted, the exercise appears at the end of section 2.4. If you read
section 2.4, you will find that the exercise is answered in the first few
paragraphs of that section.

I am curious and don't have that text. Would you be so kind
as to give the answer, for the benefit of me and others who
also don't have the text?

 

[kim]

for (int i = 100; --i >= 0
{
// process i
}

is superior than the other solution : comparing an integer to 0 is more
effective than comparing to any other value.

Are ints unsigned by default on most of your platforms?
Otherwise, on what microprocessor architecture is it faster to check if
a _signed_ int is larger than or equal to 0?

 

[Frederick Gotham]

posted:

Are ints unsigned by default on most of your platforms?
Otherwise, on what microprocessor architecture is it faster to check if
a _signed_ int is larger than or equal to 0?

int is signed on all platforms.

 

[Rui Maciel]

Then it's a trick question, or it's a question asked by a silly
person.

Indeed it was one of the worse formulated and fundamented questions that I
ever saw in a usenet post.


Best regards
Rui Maciel

 

[Murali Krishna]

Sorry but maybe I should have asked

why is

for(int i=0; i < 100; ++i)
//process i

is poor?

if you process only i for no reason, the loop is useless or the loop is
meant for delaying the process. If the loop has flower brackets and
processes i in that, I think it is a bad programming practice unless it
has a reason or condition to do so. Otherwise, i can be be processed in
the incrementor of the for loop.

-- Murali Krishna.

 

[Earl Purple]

Why is for(int i=0; i < 100; ++i) poor?

Actually I have a for_n algortihm so I can call:

for_n( 100, functor );

or is it the other way round I can't remember.
The functor can maintain a count if it needs it.

 

[Suma Shanbhog]

Newbie here....
Don't you think that the control variable("i" in this case) is pre
incremented which is different from the usual way......??
I have mostly seen examples where the control variable is post
incremented.........
Does it makes a difference?

 

[Zara]

Sorry but maybe I should have asked

why is

for(int i=0; i < 100; ++i)
//process i

is poor?

The comment is really stupid

 

[Marcus Kwok]

Suma,
Please do not top-post. Your responses belong either below, or
interspersed with, the trimmed quoted text that you are replying to.

Newbie here....
Don't you think that the control variable("i" in this case) is pre
incremented which is different from the usual way......??
I have mostly seen examples where the control variable is post
incremented.........
Does it makes a difference?

This is addressed in the FAQ:
http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/operator-overloading.html#faq-13.15

Also, since you say you're a newbie, you should read the entire FAQ.
There's lots of good stuff in there.

 

[Suma Shanbhog]

Suma,
Please do not top-post. Your responses belong either below, or
interspersed with, the trimmed quoted text that you are replying to.

Sorry!
Was not aware!

Suma