Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { })
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 10:19:15 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <vu7je4$6np6$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>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 10:19:16 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8eb31cc68ac7961ec1c62a6825d64af0";
	logging-data="220966"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19Aprig5a2tnS8D2PyDltEW"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.8.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:yk+p4rrhMk0E3M6Kq7DuFPjcyWs=
In-Reply-To: <vu6iau$377r9$1@dont-email.me>
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110
Bytes: 2360

On 22.04.2025 00:54, bart wrote:
> On 21/04/2025 22:06, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
>> [...]
> 
>> The intent of 'for' is to iterate over some collection.  Each of
>> A, B, C is needed to know the collection.
> 
> Sure, but ALL ON THE SAME LINE?

No one suggested (or forces you) to do that.

> All within the same parentheses?

It makes sense in programming languages to have a syntactic frame
for things that belong together.

> Putting multiple things on the same line is usually frowned upon.

There's of course exceptions but basically yes.

> Look at these ludicrous examples:

I suggest to just not make up ludicrous examples. We would certainly
all be happy if you'd stop that.

Janis

> [...]