🚀 go-pugleaf

Hoo boy, did I ever mess up in my last posting.
I forgot that a C "for" loop may be executed zero times.
So, let me rephrase my conviction that a C "for" loop is superfluous
because it can be replaced by an equivalent "while" loop, NOT an
equivalent "do ... while" loop:

    for (i = 0; i <= 17; i = sqr(i) + 2)
       <stuff>;

versus:

    i = 0;
    while (i <= 17)
    {
        <stuff>;
        i = sqr(i) + 2;
    }

There.  I hope I have redeemed myself in the face of my previous blasphemy.

And now that I think about it, it IS nice to have final incrementational
conditions in the loop declaration rather than at the end of the loop-body,
as the "while" case forces you to do.
   (Although I do still believe that the initial "statement" field of a
"for" loop is superfluous.)

-- 
Jeff Boeing:  ...!csun.edu!csuna!abcscagz    (formerly tracer@stb.UUCP)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"When Polly's in trouble I am not slow  /  It's hup, hup, hup and awaay I go!"
                            -- Underdog