Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 18:12:41 07/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 21, 2003 at 21:11:09, Dave Gomboc wrote:
>On July 20, 2003 at 08:01:50, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>I also thought about the following code but
>>I do not like if commands and I understood it is better
>>to have branchless code.
>>
>>do
>>{
>> f(i);
>> if (i==n)
>> break;
>> i++;
>>}
>>while (1);
>
>There must be a branch somewhere; whether it is implicit in a for-loop or
>explicit with break is not terribly important. There's nothing wrong with this
>chunk of code, and if you would otherwise have to duplicate the real code that
>you use f(i) to represent, then it's your best option for code clarity.
>
>I would write it as
>
> do {
> // here is the code that you are doing
> // over and over throughout the loop
> // that you used f(i) to represent
>
> if (n == i) break;
> i++;
> } while (1);
>
>but that's just stylistic. The whitespace before the line with the break will
>grab the eye.
>
>Dave
Sorry, use ++i rather than i++ in that code sample. I forgot to flip it after
editing your code.
Dave
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.