• Georg D. (6/6) Dec 20 2002 hello,
• Evan McClanahan (5/13) Dec 21 2002 ++i and i++ both have valid and different semantic meanings. Both are
• Walter (5/11) Dec 27 2002 _something_;

"Georg D." <georg nospam.net> writes:

hello,

in various documentation texts there is "for (int i = 0; i < _something_;
i++)".
why i++? I think it should be ++i, no metter how good optimizer we have.

regards,
Georg

Evan McClanahan <evan dontSPAMaltarinteractive.com> writes:

Georg D. wrote:
 hello,
 
 in various documentation texts there is "for (int i = 0; i < _something_;
 i++)".
 why i++? I think it should be ++i, no metter how good optimizer we have.
 
 regards,
 Georg

++i and i++ both have valid and different semantic meanings.  Both are 
allowed in D.  I don't see what difference it makes which one you use in 
a loop.

Evan

"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:

"Evan McClanahan" <evan dontSPAMaltarinteractive.com> wrote in message
news:au25pi$2nsb$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 in various documentation texts there is "for (int i = 0; i <


_something_;
 i++)".
 why i++? I think it should be ++i, no metter how good optimizer we have.

 ++i and i++ both have valid and different semantic meanings.  Both are
 allowed in D.  I don't see what difference it makes which one you use in
 a loop.

Since for that use, the same code will be generated for either, which you
use is purely a matter of personal taste.