this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2023
1656 points (96.5% liked)

Memes

45726 readers
812 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ChrislyBear@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

I disagree. It's a while loop, because a for-loop is finite, so you can't count to infinity with it.

[–] Pitri@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 1 year ago

there is no reason for a (non-foreach) for loop to be any more or less finite than a while loop.

for (a; b; c)
{
  d;
}

is just syntactic sugar for

{
  a;
  while (b)
  {
    d;
    c;
  }
}

in most or all languages with c-like syntax.

[–] MBM@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

for (i=0; true; i++)

[–] isildun@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

There's nothing special about a generic for loop (at least in C-like languages). There's no reason you couldn't do something like for (i = 0; true; i++) to make it infinite. Some languages even support an infinite list generator syntax like for i in [0..] (e.g. it lazily generates 0, then 1, then 2, etc. on each iteration) so you can use a for-each style loop to iterate infinitely.

Now, whether or not you should do such things is another question entirely. I won't pretend there aren't any instances where it's useful, but most of the time you're better off with a different structure.

[–] Kempeth@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

I wanna see how you get a while loop to actually go to infinity. I'll wait...

on second thought, no I won't.