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: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 23:52:05 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <vu96ik$1j6ll$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vspbjh$8dvd$1@dont-email.me> <vtl166$36p6b$1@dont-email.me>
 <vtlcg0$3f46a$2@dont-email.me> <vtnekn$1fogv$1@dont-email.me>
 <vto2mb$20c4n$1@dont-email.me> <vtu4i5$3hteg$1@dont-email.me>
 <vtujko$3uida$1@dont-email.me> <vtvfop$rf2p$1@dont-email.me>
 <vtvto2$15otp$1@dont-email.me> <vu01k7$1bfv2$1@dont-email.me>
 <vu0720$1dva7$1@dont-email.me> <vu2hmg$3jn88$1@dont-email.me>
 <vu2mkc$3noft$1@dont-email.me> <vu5ig6$3catv$1@paganini.bofh.team>
 <vu5ol1$2h3r8$1@dont-email.me> <vu6bvn$3dsrl$1@paganini.bofh.team>
 <vu6iau$377r9$1@dont-email.me> <874iyh153g.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
 <vu6nnv$3apt8$2@dont-email.me> <87sem1yoqm.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
 <vu7rrt$dr1u$1@dont-email.me> <871ptjzymw.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 00:52:04 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="17e45e44728eb9bc3d7b9f503a0e88d8";
	logging-data="1678005"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX193DBSp4b7o90ExpLN5xcNk"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:0sTAxaNEwsV2HVGPcZBpfdGLpuU=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <871ptjzymw.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
Bytes: 3159

On 22/04/2025 22:15, Keith Thompson wrote:
> bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>> On 22/04/2025 02:22, Keith Thompson wrote:
> [...]
>>> For example, in my post to which you replied, I discussed at
>>> some length how I like to split for loops if they're too long.
>>> You snipped that discussion *and then* insinuated that I don't care
>>> about complex loops written on one line.  Please stop doing things
>>> like that.
>>
>> Well I care about it too, and I would write such things more sensibly
>> as well. But so what? Most code I see tends to be badly
>> formatted. For-headers are not split up unless they're long enough to
>> overflow the line.
>>
>> It's something about the culture behind 'for' that encourages poor
>> coding style.
> 
> Did you miss my point, or did you deliberately ignore it?
> 
> You snipped part of my text in which I discussed how I like to split
> long for loops.  You then insinuated that I personally don't care
> about complex loops written on one line, after I clearly demonstrated
> that I do, and you hid the evidence.
> 
> I'm asking you to stop doing that kind of thing.
> 
> I'm making a point, not about technical disagreements, but about you,
> deliberately or otherwise, misrepresenting what I've written.
> 

I think my comments above stand.

Of course, everybody here (me included) will claim their own code is 
cleanly laid out; it's everybody else's that is the problem.