Proposal: A simple for loop

[gulshan]

This is a tiny feature request and does not actually solve any specific problem. When encountered for loops in C, I did not get that much resemblance between the name for and the looping mechanism it provides. In my mind, to bear the resemblance, for would look something simpler, like this-

for(n)
{
    // This loop will run "for" "n" times
    // n can be short/int/long
}

So, hereby, I am requesting this feature in C#.

[orthoxerox]

How often do you need a loop that will run n times with no way to determine the current iteration?

[magol]

I agree that current C-inspired for-loop is not the best. It's clumsy to write and unnecessarily verbose. The reason it looks like it does is for flexibility. But in C#, we can not take advantage of all the flexibility that C offers.

When you use for-loops, it is common to increase by 1. So in most cases, it is unnecessary to write i++.

I agree that there should be a shorter notation for counted loops, but the index variable must be included. We maybe can get inspection from other languages.

[Unknown6656]

@magol: With slices/ranges (#185, #198) one should be able to write this code here soon (I think C#7.3 or greater):

foreach (var _ in 0..10)
{
    // ...
}

It is not super-compact, but I think that is OK. I do not think, that there is a real need for more optimization/compaction

[gulshan]

I already said, this does not solve any specific problem. May be new comers will be more comfortable to start with this simple for loop. That's all.

[magol]

@Unknown6656 ah, I had forgotten about that. Thanks for the reminder about slices/ranges :-)
It is not super compact, but it is easier to read and write then the for-syntax.

[bondsbw]

@Unknown6656 Honestly though that isn't strictly better than

foreach (0..10)
{
    // ...
}

It might not hit the +100 point mark but I think it's worth considering.

[Unknown6656]

other thought -- relying on "extension operators"(#515) and copying C's implicit int to bool conversion:

int count = 10;

while (--count)
{
    // ....
}

with the following operator somewhere defined in the background:

internal static implicit operator bool (int v) => v != 0;

---

@bondsbw
@magol

[bondsbw]

That makes me sad.

[Unknown6656]

@bondsbw I know ....... me too ......

But it is a brutal world out there ....
I've heard there are even languages out there, where you do not define a variable's type, as it could be anything at runtime...... Or even worse: change it's type at runtime............

---

If you see signs of Javascript, Python or PHP - it is not yet too late.
We are here to help you.
#notice_the_signs

[mburbea]

I've personally always been a fan of this looping construct::

int count = 10;
while(count --> 0){
  // ...
}

The --> or goes to operator makes it so explicit.

[jnm2]

Why not scope the iteration variable?

for (var count = 10; count --> 0;)
{
  // ...
}

[lachbaer]

for (var i = 1 to 10 step 2) { ... }

just kidding... 🤣

[MkazemAkhgary]

This is my preferred one.

for (object boxedCounter = Activator.CreateInstance(Type.GetType("System.Decimal"), Activator.CreateInstance(Type.GetType("System.Int32")));
        (Type.GetType("System.Int32").GetRuntimeMethods().Where(m => m.Name.SequenceEqual("Equals")).ToArray()[0].Invoke(Type.GetType("System.Decimal").GetRuntimeMethods().Where(m => m.Name.SequenceEqual("CompareTo")).ToArray()[0].Invoke((decimal)boxedCounter,
        new object[] { Activator.CreateInstance(Type.GetType("System.Decimal"), Type.GetType("System.Int32").GetRuntimeMethods().Where(m => m.Name.SequenceEqual("Parse")).ToArray()[0].Invoke(null, new object[] { "10" })) }), new object[] {
            Type.GetType("System.Int32").GetRuntimeMethods().Where(m => m.Name.SequenceEqual("Parse")).ToArray()[0].Invoke(null, new object[] { "-1" })})).ToString().Cast<object>().SequenceEqual(new object[] { 'T', 'r', 'u', 'e'});
        boxedCounter = Type.GetType("System.Decimal").GetMethod("op_Addition").Invoke(null, new object[] { (decimal)boxedCounter, Activator.CreateInstance(Type.GetType("System.Decimal"), Type.GetType("System.Int32").GetRuntimeMethods().Where(m => m.Name.SequenceEqual("Parse")).ToArray()[0].Invoke(null, new object[] { "1" })) }))
{
    var i = (int)(decimal)boxedCounter;
}

[Nukepayload2]

What about this?

#pragma language using VB
For i = 0 To 10
#pragma language restore
    Console.WriteLine(i);
}

[AustinBryan]

namespace MyNamespace
{
    public static void For<T>(int length, Func<T> body)
    {
        for (int i = 0; i < length; i++)
             body();
    }
}

...

using static MyNamespace.For;

public static Main() => For(10, () => 
{
    Console.WriteLine();
});