Popular posts

Well, the reason for i was choose as local variable for loop is just because the loop var is always integer type. So i was chosen because it is the initial letter of the integer word. Why j and k, you and other may wonder. If you still remember alphabet, it is the 2 following letters after i. It was chosen for exceptional cases, loop nest. Why only 2 letters? No-one stops from having the third, but I don't think 4 loops in a row is a good algorithm, or at least that's the me right now.

And you was right about the n. I suppose to use r, it makes more sense then n. Thanks for reminding me. I can agree with you about vague name conventions. It's always nightmare to me. Especially I'm not English native speaker, decide which words to be used could take me a day, even worse, I dropped the whole idea 'coz I couldn't find a good term for my class or var or func. :))

Thanks again for sharing your opinion :)

I'm well aware of the i,j,k thing, that's why I said that was a non-issue requiring no explanation/expansion. That's fine as it is.

It also makes more sense than the norm in Pascal/Modula/Ada (what I first learned decades ago) which is t, n, u -- love to hear someone explain that one.

No wonder Pascal doesn't interest me =))

In old Fortran, I, J, K, L, M, N or anything starting with those letters used to be implicitly integer. But that only covers the N in T, N, U so it's probably not related... Interesting little fact, perhaps :-)

Personally I like to not use i because I used to work with complex numbers (2+1i) and I sometimes confused them.

I had a friend who's explanation at least sounds plausible. The full run is supposedly T, N, U, O, C... which is "count" backwards. Dunno if that's really what it is, but it seems plausible.

M Man, complex number! How could I forget it. Interesting fact... What do you do btw?

Jason Knight Sound fair enough, but why count backward? Why not just forwards?

Đăng Tú Not sure, but with "reverse polish notation" and languages with FIFO evaluation stacks actually being a thing, who knows?

It's a bit like the little-endian vs. big-endian "debate" -- or the ML Operator order preference between 'AT&T / Motorola' and "Intel" styles. Subjects that during the mainframe vs. microcomputer war of the '80's were free-fire zones with deeply entrenched lines.

The historical irony being that by the end of the 16 bit Micro era the intel style had all but won the fight, but along comes 32 bits and home systems powerful enough to run sloppy mainframe style code and the latter won out in the long term. See GAS' preference for Motorola Syntax and how posixisms were revived from near extinction.