/prog/ - for ( — World4ch

Name: i = 0 2010-09-14 4:24

++i

Name: VIPPER 2010-09-14 4:26

JEWS

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 4:54

>>2
Way to miss a point, genous.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 5:49

JACKSON 5 GET

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 7:08

He said, "Jack move! Get on the floor, I'm the Suss man and I want what's yours"

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 11:27

"You'll never part me with my virginity!!", Jack replied.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 12:16

>>5
^* your's

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 16:19

Are you freaked? Stop pressin' that button
It's not "any key" so it won't do nothin'
R6RS introduced syntax-case
Shouldn't be a prick with a hole in the face

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 17:03

SPICE GIRLS 9 GET

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 17:05

R6RS introduced syntax-case
Actually, its at least 15 years old

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 17:44

>>10
15 years old
jailbait

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 18:53

>>11
actually, on further research the paper "Writing Hygienic Macros in Scheme with Syntax-Case" by Dybvig is from 1992, and it had been developed over the previous few years, so it is 18+ years.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 19:29

18+ years
fully legal

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 22:17

is ++i faster than i++ ?

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 22:38

>>14
who cares, they're both slower than i += 1

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-15 14:14

>>14
If you use ++i as the 3rd expression in a for loop, Dennis Ritchie stabs you in the face.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-15 16:20

>>15
which, in turn, is slower than i = i + 1

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-15 16:31

I gonna cry myself to sleep now.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-15 18:23

>>16
why's that?

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-15 19:17

>>19
Because you're either thoughtlessly following braindead recommendations from C++ programmers, or you're using C++ yourself (and using operator overloading) and deserve to be stabbed anyway.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-15 19:33

>>20
I really don't get your point. So, why shouldn't I use ++i in a for loop's 3rd expression?

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-15 19:39

>>21
Because there's no justifiable reason to use it over i++ in C. Or even C++ if i isn't an object. Perhaps you should like to explain why you would ever want to?

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-03 7:22

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-04 16:17

Name: Anonymous 2013-09-01 14:33

The earliest recorded idea of infinity comes from Anaximander, a pre-Socratic Greek philosopher who lived in Miletus. He used the word apeiron which means infinite or limitless.

Name: Anonymous 2013-09-01 14:39

Anaximander - JEW

for (

1 Name: i = 0 2010-09-14 4:24

2 Name: VIPPER 2010-09-14 4:26

3 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 4:54

4 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 5:49

5 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 7:08

6 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 11:27

7 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 12:16

8 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 16:19

9 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 17:03

10 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 17:05

11 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 17:44

12 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 18:53

13 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 19:29

14 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 22:17

15 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-14 22:38

16 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-15 14:14

17 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-15 16:20

18 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-15 16:31

19 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-15 18:23

20 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-15 19:17

21 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-15 19:33

22 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-15 19:39

23 Name: Anonymous 2011-02-03 7:22

24 Name: Anonymous 2011-02-04 16:17

25 Name: Anonymous 2013-09-01 14:33

26 Name: Anonymous 2013-09-01 14:39