Only negative reactions to `else for` so far, and it's only used a couple of
times in our code:
http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/search?q=else%5B+%5D%2B(do%7Cfor%7Cswitch%7Cwhile)%5B+%5D&case=true®exp=true&path=*.cpp
So I'll add a clarification in the coding style page, that `else` should only
be followed by `{` or `if`.
On Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 10:41:41 AM UTC+12, Jeff Gilbert wrote:
> IMO: Never else-for. (or else-while)
>
> Else-if is a reasonable continuation of concept: "Well it wasn't that,
> what if it's this instead?"
> Else-for is just shorthand for "well it wasn't that, so let's loop
> over something".
>
> Else-if is generally used for chaining, often effectively as an
> advanced switch/match statement.
>
> I've never actually seen else-for, but I imagine it would be used for:
> if (!foo) {
> } else for (i = 0; i < foo->bar; i++) {
> }
>
> I don't think this pattern has enough value to be acceptable as
> shorthand. BUT, I didn't know it was a thing until now, so I'm
> naturally biased against it.
>
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 2:58 PM, <gsque...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> > Let's keep the flames alive!
> >
> > Should we always put braces after an `else`, with the only exception being
> > another `if`?
> > Or should we also have exceptions for the other control structures (while,
> > do, for, switch)?
> >
> > A.
> > if (...) {
> > ...
> > } else {
> > for (...) {
> > ...
> > }
> > }
> >
> > B.
> > if (...) {
> > ...
> > } else for (...) {
> > ...
> > }
> >
> > I can see arguments for&against both, so I'm not too sure which one should
> > win. :-)
> > WDYT?
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
