foreach

[Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d]

On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:36:20 -0400, Ary Borenszweig <ary at esperanto.org.ar>  
wrote:

> On 6/12/14, 2:11 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 11:00:11 -0400, Manu via Digitalmars-d
>> <digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I often find myself wanting to write this:
>>>   foreach(; 0..n) {}
>>> In the case that I just want to do something n times and I don't
>>> actually care about the loop counter, but this doesn't compile.
>>
>> The compiler has to assign a variable to this somehow so it can
>> increment and test. Naming it isn't the worst thing in the world. As
>> others have said, pick an uncommon name.
>>
>>>
>>> You can do this:
>>>   for(;;) {}
>>>
>>> If 'for' lets you omit any of the loop terms, surely it makes sense
>>> that foreach would allow you to omit the first term as well?
>>> I see no need to declare a superfluous loop counter when it is unused.
>>
>> But that doesn't increment a variable and test it. If you wanted to loop
>> for N times, you need a variable.
>
> The compiler needs a variable. The programmer doesn't.

In response to both you and HS Teoh, so what? It's not hard to create a  
variable, just do it. This seems like the most insignificant time-saving  
feature that will really have almost no impact on anybody. It's not worth  
the risk it adds some bug to the compiler to add this feature.

-Steve