On Thu, 9 Jun 2005, Michael Haardt wrote:
> If so, I should write "while (n>=(off_t)1)" instead of "while (n)".
I never write "while (n)" if n is numeric. I always write "while (n != 0)".
I prefer not to conflate what are logically Boolean values with numeric
values. Similarly, I always write "while (p != NULL)" if p is a pointer.
I recently became aware of a programming convention where you put the
constant on the lhs, that is, you write "if (42 == n)" instead of
"if (n == 42)". The idea is that you will get a compiler error if you
write "=" instead of "==". However, if you do write "if (n = 42)" gcc
warns you about it, so I am not convinced of the merits of this, since
it reads rather unnaturally.
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
Get the Exim 4 book: http://www.uit.co.uk/exim-book
