News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on A Review of the Zig Programming Language (Using Advent of Code 2021). Parent comment

Re:A Review of the Zig Programming Language (Using Advent of... by dnautics on Monday December 27, 2021 @01:42PM (#29705366)
man if I were andrew I'd just rename for to "foreach", because this is a huge complaint and source of confusion.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A Review of the Zig Programming Language (Using Advent of... by kzrdude on Monday December 27, 2021 @02:01PM (#29705594)
Seems fine to me. Rust has a "foreach" which is named for, working ok. Of course Rust has ranges as iterators, so it's not necessarily noticed that "there is no numerical for" but it works.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A Review of the Zig Programming Language (Using Advent of... by masklinn on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @07:39AM (#29713183)
> Rust has a "foreach" which is named for, working ok.

Also ruby / python.

Don't see the point of a C-style for loop in a modern language, reusing the keyword is perfectly sensible (even more so as many which have both use the same keyword).

C# actively weirds me out every time from having both for and foreach, complete waste of brainspace.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A Review of the Zig Programming Language (Using Advent of... by anonymoushn on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @07:04AM (#29712935)
It seems fine to just delete it if it's only ever going to work on slices and arrays
[ Parent | on HN ]