a style question

[Steve Emmerson]

In <12683:Oct102:57:1590 at kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd at kramden.acf.nyu.edu 
(Dan Bernstein) writes:

>In article <8660 at ncar.ucar.edu> steve at groucho.ucar.edu (Steve Emmerson) writes:
>> 	# define NUM_ELEMENTS	100
>> 	for (x = 0; x < NUM_ELEMENTS; x++) ...

>Hmmm. I'll automatically write x = NUM_ELEMENTS; while (x--) ... for
>this kind of loop. On many computers it'll run noticeably faster, and I
>can safely replace NUM_ELEMENTS by a function call.

If the loop-body doesn't care, then I don't either.  My point was the
use of a symbolic name rather than a hard-coded magic cookie (i.e.
NUM_ELEMENTS rather than "100").

Steve Emmerson        steve at unidata.ucar.edu        ...!ncar!unidata!steve