Yet another reason I hate C++

for

(long i = 0; parameters.GetCount(); i++) {

What could be wrong with that??

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh. Curse you C++!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Can't that at least be a warning?

Comments

• Anonymous
  June 25, 2004
  The conditional part of the for(...) is constant, and therefore, an infinite loop will occur.
  
  (Duh;)
• Anonymous
  June 25, 2004
  Austin: the "What could be wrong with that??" was rhetorical.
  
  I was more angry that C++ allows non boolean conditionals.
  
  Bane of my life I tell you.
• Anonymous
  June 25, 2004
  I know. (Hence the ;) by the Duh).
• Anonymous
  June 25, 2004
  While annoying at times, it's one of those power features certain people like myself miss when working with C#.
  
  Orion Adrian
• Anonymous
  June 25, 2004
  Orion: I'm not sure I see anything powerful about that feature at all.
• Anonymous
  June 25, 2004
  Austin: Sorry :-)
  
  Missed that.
• Anonymous
  June 26, 2004
  Cyrus,
  
  i disagree. its nice to have non-boolean conditions. in c#, i hate it to be forces to write...
  
  object o = null;
  
  if( o == null)
  
  instead of if( o)
  
  yes, the c# compiler makes sure that i make sure i know what i do. but quite often, i'd rather decide myself. each time i have to write '== null', for example.
  
  WM_DISAGREE
  thomas woelfer
  
• Anonymous
  June 26, 2004
  The comment has been removed
• Anonymous
  June 26, 2004
  The comment has been removed
• Anonymous
  June 26, 2004
  The comment has been removed
• Anonymous
  June 27, 2004
  The comment has been removed
• Anonymous
  June 27, 2004
  Doug: Don't even get me started on implicit conversions!! :-)
  
  Bleagh......
• Anonymous
  July 01, 2004
  "What could be wrong with that??
  
  Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh. Curse you C++!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Can't that at least be a warning?"
  
  What's it meant to warn you about?
  
  For all the compiler knows the code could be:
  for(int i(0); parameters.GetCount(); ++i)
  {
  cout << "The " << i << "th parameter is " << parameters.Top() << endl;
  parameters.PopTop();
  }
  
• Anonymous
  July 01, 2004
  Dr Pizza: It's meant to warn me that the conditional expression is not actually a boolean conditional.
  
  As all the posts in here have shown, i don't believe in implicit conversions. Especially between something like numbers and booleans. 0 does not mean false in any system for me. Just as non-zero doesn't mean true either.
  
  I'm well aware of why that code compiles and runs. But what I would like is to tell the compiler "warn me if the expression in the condition does not evaluate to a boolean expression.
  
  Does that clarify it?
  
• Anonymous
  July 09, 2004
  The comment has been removed
• Anonymous
  July 09, 2004
  Dung: What about it?
  
  That seems perfectly reasonable if mouseExists was a boolean type...
• Anonymous
  July 22, 2004
  No. Stick shifts rule. :-)
  
  http://weblogs.asp.net/mikhailarkhipov/archive/2004/07/22/191682.aspx
  
• Anonymous
  August 03, 2004
  why hate it? say the function returns a value based on a shared memory that changes everytime? say a register, etc. isn't it a good feature?
• Anonymous
  August 03, 2004
  Piping Pepito: How would that change anything?