sorting failed error

[monarch_dodra]

On Monday, 30 July 2012 at 22:58:28 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 07/31/2012 12:30 AM, maarten van damme wrote:
>> 2012/7/31 Timon Gehr<timon.gehr at gmx.ch>:
>>> ...
>>> further comments whose application does not lead to immediate 
>>> benefit:
>>>
>>> - in contracts are better specified in their dedicated 
>>> section to push
>>> the requirements onto the caller.
>>>
>>> - consider for(;;) as a means for indefinite looping.
>>>
>>> - the convention is upper case for type names
>>
>> Thank you very much for this criticism, I'm relatively new to
>> programming and these mistakes/points are the kind off things 
>> you
>> can't learn from reading a book or two.
>>
>
> I'm glad to help.
>
>> I have one little question about one of the last points though
>> why use for(;;)?
>
> Well, as stated, there is no benefit.
>
>> As far as I can tell this simply reduces readability from 
>> while(true).
>
> That is entirely a matter of preference.
>
>> Is there any reason for this?
>
> I like it more because it says "loop".
> while(true) says: "loop as long as 'true' still holds", which 
> is silly.

I've usually see the "for(;;)" syntax to loop infinity: This 
reads as: Just keep looping, with no condition.