Ranter
Join devRant
Do all the things like
				++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
				Sign Up
			Pipeless API
 
				From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
				Learn More
			Comments
		
- 
				
				I am actually genuinely interested in this!
 What are the ups and downs of each of them?
- 
				
				 LMagnus20318yThe second one takes slightly less brain power to read. LMagnus20318yThe second one takes slightly less brain power to read.
 
 In terms of performance you'll not notice any difference, so go for the one your co-workers will need to use slightly less brain power on.
- 
				
				 sha-i2068yThe second one lets you see the count and not the final index in 0-based arrays which is why I like it... sha-i2068yThe second one lets you see the count and not the final index in 0-based arrays which is why I like it...
 
 for (int i = 0; i < myList.Count; i++) { ...
- 
				
				 Root772328yBoth: Root772328yBoth:
 
 <= for when the number itself has meaning.
 < for limits or lengths of arrays/strings/etc.
 
 Pick the one that conveys the most information about your intent in the most readable way.
- 
				
				 Cyan1011678yIt depends on what the loop is for, if you want people to know it's specifically running 9 times then the first one Cyan1011678yIt depends on what the loop is for, if you want people to know it's specifically running 9 times then the first one
- 
				
				If it is to loop through a collection, clearly the second one. When you need a specific range I rather like the first.
- 
				
				This has actually been analysed.
 
 Dijkstra wrote about bounds checking and the best way that minimises errors.
 
 Basically:
 
 0 <= x < N
 
 is the way to do it.
- 
				
				 mt3o18768y@LoveBytes @sha-i it is widely said that explicitly stating collection.size() is not slower than keeping local copy of the size. mt3o18768y@LoveBytes @sha-i it is widely said that explicitly stating collection.size() is not slower than keeping local copy of the size.
Related Rants









 I've seen people do more than 4 as well though
I've seen people do more than 4 as well though
 Best xample
Best xample
 Where's my caviar
Where's my caviar
Loop counter conditions.
10 loops for example in this scenario:
i<=9
OR
i<10
Was arguing with a co-worker all week over this 😂
undefined
loops
conditions