not really, the int will eventually overflow and cycle around ;) On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 8:11 AM, Xavier Ho <cont...@xavierho.com> wrote:
> Did no one notice that > > > for(i = 99; i > 0; ++i) > > Gives you an infinite loop (sort of) because i starts a 99, and increases > every loop? > > Cheers, > > Ching-Yun Xavier Ho, Technical Artist > > Contact Information > Mobile: (+61) 04 3335 4748 > Skype ID: SpaXe85 > Email: cont...@xavierho.com > Website: http://xavierho.com/ > > > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 9:40 PM, Alf P. Steinbach <al...@start.no> wrote: > >> * Jean-Michel Pichavant: >> >>> John Nagle wrote: >>> >>>> Jonathan Hayward wrote: >>>> >>>>> I've posted "Usability, the Soul of Python: An Introduction to the >>>>> Python Programming Language Through the Eyes of Usability", at: >>>>> >>>>> http://JonathansCorner.com/python/ >>>>> >>>> >>>> No, it's just a rather verbose introduction to Python, in dark brown >>>> type on a light brown background. One could write a good paper on this >>>> topic, but this isn't it. >>>> >>>> >>>> John Nagle >>>> >>> Why is it bad ? >>> >> >> Consider >> >> >> <quote> >> >From a usability standpoint, the braces go with the lines to print out >> the stanza rather than the for statement or the code after, so the following >> is best: >> >> for(i = 99; i > 0; ++i) >> { >> printf("%d slabs of spam in my mail!\n", i); >> printf("%d slabs of spam,\n", i); >> printf("Send one to abuse and Just Hit Delete,\n"); >> printf("%d slabs of spam in my mail!\n\n", i + 1); >> } >> </quote> >> >> >> This is just unsubstantiated opinion, but worse, it makes a tacit >> assumption that there is "best" way to do indentation. However, most >> programmers fall into that trap, and I've done it myself. In fact, when I >> worked as a consultant (then in Andersen Consulting, now Accenture) I used >> the style above. Petter Hesselberg, author of "Industrial Strength Windows >> Programming" (heh, I'm mentioned) asked my why on Earth I did that, like, >> nobody does that? It was a habit I'd picked up in Pascal, from very naïve >> considerations of parse nesting levels, a kind of misguided idealism instead >> of more practical pragmatism, but since I realized that that was an >> incredibly weak argument I instead answered by pointing towards Charles >> Petzold's code in his "Programming Windows" books. And amazingly I was >> allowed to continue using this awkward and impractical style. >> >> I may or may not have been responsible for the similarly impractical >> compromise convention of using three spaces per indentation level. At least, >> in one big meeting the question about number of spaces was raised by the >> speaker, and I replied from the benches, just in jest, "three!". And that >> was it (perhaps). >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> - Alf (admitting to earlier mistakes) >> >> -- >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list >> > > > -- > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > >
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
