Never a truer word said -
Along with those awful for(..;..;..){} things that were so prone to errors -
< instead of > and all that. Along with the "out by one" brigade of errors.I can't sing enough praises of the RB "for each" construct. In fact its only now that the C++ community is finally considering implementing such a thing in C00. ( and from what I gather the wording will be ugly ) On 12/10/06 22:16, "Norman Palardy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Who has never seen a C bug based on code like > > if ( x = y ) > > which likely should read > > if ( x == y ) _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives of this list here: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
