Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> The following should (sorry, could) be ok:
>
> for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
> doSomething();
> if (amIRight()) cool();
> doSomethingElse();
> }
One point here:
If it's not amIRight() but
if (amIRight() || ( more stuff follows .............) cool();
doSomethingElse();
you tend to ignore the cool() stuff in favor of doSomethingElse.
I can't count the times I've seen people hunt for this kind of
bug (most when changing someone else's code, of course).
Which is why I always use:
if (foo)
doFoo();
On the whole I think you would be served best by forbidding
if (foo) doFoo();
and allowing
if (foo)
doFoo();
else
doBar();
as well as
if (foo) {
doFoo();
}
else {
doBar();
}
leaving this issue to personal taste.
Just my 2 cents.
--
Cappelino Informationstechnologie GmbH
Arnd Bei�ner
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
