On Wednesday, 9 January 2013 at 17:07:50 UTC, ixid wrote:
It would be even nicer to be able to write for(i;5) and have it behave as foreach.
I hated java's choice to use for as foreach. It does not prepare me for the semantics of what I'm about to read. And when I go to write it and don't remember, is it for(Type thing; range) or for(Type thing, range)? no it is for(Type thing : range)
I was already heavily using foreach in do before Java got one.
