Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] drm/format-helper: Add drm_fb_xrgb8888_to_gray8_line()

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Andy,

On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 11:39 AM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 10:03:53AM +0100, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
> > Am 11.02.22 um 16:41 schrieb Andy Shevchenko:
> > > > IMO *always* prefer a for loop over while or do-while.
> > > >
> > > > The for (i = 0; i < N; i++) is such a strong paradigm in C. You
> > > > instantly know how many times you're going to loop, at a glance. Not so
> > > > with with the alternatives, which should be used sparingly.
> > >
> > > while () {}  _is_ a paradigm, for-loop is syntax sugar on top of it.
> >
> > Naw, that's not true.
>
> In the section 3.5 "Loops - While and For" in "The C Programming
> Language" 2nd by K&R, the authors said:
>
>         The for statement ... is equivalent to ... while..."
>
> They said that for is equivalent to while, and not otherwise.

When I learned C, people told me to prefer while() over for() when
possible, as several compilers are better at optimizing while()-loops
than for()-loops.

During the last 3 decades, optimizers got better, and all the bad
old compilers went the way of the dodo (see also [1])...
But even for a human, it's still less symbols to decode (and verify
all the details about =/</>/<=/>=/++/--/...) for

    while (n--) { ... }

than for

   for (i = 0; i < n; i++) { ... }

[1] https://lwn.net/Articles/871283/

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds