Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: bart <bc@freeuk.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { })
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 12:38:07 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <vto4qu$23kmr$2@dont-email.me>
References: <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>
 <ad1vvjtvk7ppgdfdp047uk60o13j0jvr13@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 13:38:07 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="507c987f563baeac8cb4b74b82477869";
	logging-data="2216667"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+43JJRP0QXzrjNhImniguM"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mxqdgXi7rObc2nUKaBW+Gl2GAv8=
In-Reply-To: <ad1vvjtvk7ppgdfdp047uk60o13j0jvr13@4ax.com>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 2313

On 16/04/2025 11:29, Rosario19 wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Apr 2025 11:30:24 +0100, bart wrote:
> 
>>    for (i=0 i<=N; ++i)
>>
>> Most such loops iterate over 0..N-1 inclusive, so would need "<". So, in
>> your opinion, is that <= a typo, or is the intention to iterate over
>> 0..N inclusive (so N+1 iterations)?
>>
>>
>> (May reply to rest separately.)
> 
> the loop enter with i=0
> than make i= 1..N N in the count
> so would be N+1 times iterations
> that are 0..N or 0,1,2,3...,N
> 
> <= is not a Typo
> 
> i not find the problem
> 

No? What about here:

     enum {N=10};
     int A[N];

     for (int i=0; i <= N; ++i) A[i] = i;

Is there still no problem? Except this will be in the middle of 1000 
lines of busy code with longer identifiers and more elaborate expressions.