[chbot] !!!!!!!! Choc fish challenge 2 !!!!!!!!!

[Charles Manning]

On Thursday 04 August 2011 08:53:48 Andre Renaud wrote:
> On 03/08/11 22:13, Volker Kuhlmann wrote:
> > On Wed 03 Aug 2011 11:40:03 NZST +1200, Charles Manning wrote:
> >> In my books there is also a very hot place reserved for those who write
> >> things like
> >> while((*x++ = *y++)){}
> >
> > You can't really compare this with previous examples. This one is much
> > different because it is undefined, unpredictable and therefore useless
> > and much worse. Your choc fish challenge was defined in its behaviour
> > and predictable, although extremely bad programming and a convoluted way
> > to say while(1); .
>
> I don't think this is undefined - isn't this a simple implementation of
> strcpy (assuming x & y are char *)? It will continue around until it
> assigns a 0 pointer, at which point it will stop. It would be undefined
> if you had *x++ = *x++.
>

Exactly my reason why this is a bad code.

The algorithm is hidden and non obvious.

I'd far rather someone wrote:

while((*x = *y)) {
	x++;
	y++;
}