For vs. while in C programming?

Solution 1:

A while loop will always evaluate the condition first.

while (condition) {
  //gets executed after condition is checked
}

A do/while loop will always execute the code in the do{} block first and then evaluate the condition.

do {
  //gets executed at least once
} while (condition); 

A for loop allows you to initiate a counter variable, a check condition, and a way to increment your counter all in one line.

for (int x = 0; x < 100; x++) {
   //executed until x >= 100
}

At the end of the day, they are all still loops, but they offer some flexibility as to how they are executed.

Here is a great explanation of the reasoning behind the use of each different type of loop that may help clear things up. Thanks clyfe

The main difference between the for's and the while's is a matter of pragmatics: we usually use for when there is a known number of iterations, and use while constructs when the number of iterations in not known in advance. The while vs do ... while issue is also of pragmatics, the second executes the instructions once at start, and afterwards it behaves just like the simple while.

For loops are especially nice because they are concise. In order for this for loop:

for (int x = 0; x < 100; x++) {
   //executed until x >= 100
}

to be written as a while loop, you'd have to do the following:

int count = 0;
while (count < 100) {
  //do stuff
  count++;
}

In this case, there's just more stuff to keep up with and the count++; could get lost in the logic. This could end up being troublesome depending on where count gets incremented, and whether or not it should get incremented before or after the loop's logic. With a for loop, your counter variable is always incremented before the next iteration of the loop, which adds some uniformity to your code.

For the sake of completeness, it's probably meaningful to talk about break and continue statements here which come in handy when doing loop processing.

break will instantly terminate the current loop and no more iterations will be executed.

//will only run "do stuff" twice
for (int x = 0; x < 100; x++) {
  if (x == 2) {
    break;
  }
  //do stuff
}

continue will terminate the current iteration and move on to the next one.

//will run "do stuff" until x >= 100 except for when x = 2
for (int x = 0; x < 100; x++) {
  if (x == 2) {
    continue;
  }
  //do stuff
}

Note that in a for loop, continue evaluates the part3 expression of for (part1; part2; part3); in contrast, in a while loop, it just jumps to re-evaluate the loop condition.

Solution 2:

If there is a strong concern about speed and performance, the best approach is to verify the code produced by the compiler at the assembly level.

For instance, the following code shows that the "do-while" is a bit faster. This because the "jmp" instruction is not used by the "do-while" loop.

BTW, in this specific example, the worst case is given by the "for" loop. :))

int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
    int i;
    char x[100];

    // "FOR" LOOP:
    for (i=0; i<100; i++ )
    {
        x[i] = 0;
    }

    // "WHILE" LOOP:
    i = 0;
    while (i<100 )
    {
        x[i++] = 0;
    }

    // "DO-WHILE" LOOP:
    i = 0;
    do
    {
        x[i++] = 0;
    }
    while (i<100);

    return 0;
}

// "FOR" LOOP:

    010013C8  mov         dword ptr [ebp-0Ch],0
    010013CF  jmp         wmain+3Ah (10013DAh)

  for (i=0; i<100; i++ )
  {
      x[i] = 0;
    010013D1  mov         eax,dword ptr [ebp-0Ch]  <<< UPDATE i
    010013D4  add         eax,1
    010013D7  mov         dword ptr [ebp-0Ch],eax
    010013DA  cmp         dword ptr [ebp-0Ch],64h  <<< TEST
    010013DE  jge         wmain+4Ah (10013EAh)     <<< COND JUMP
    010013E0  mov         eax,dword ptr [ebp-0Ch]  <<< DO THE JOB..
    010013E3  mov         byte ptr [ebp+eax-78h],0
    010013E8  jmp         wmain+31h (10013D1h)     <<< UNCOND JUMP
  }

// "WHILE" LOOP:

  i = 0;
  010013EA  mov         dword ptr [ebp-0Ch],0
  while (i<100 )
  {
      x[i++] = 0;
    010013F1  cmp         dword ptr [ebp-0Ch],64h   <<< TEST
    010013F5  jge         wmain+6Ah (100140Ah)      <<< COND JUMP
    010013F7  mov         eax,dword ptr [ebp-0Ch]   <<< DO THE JOB..
    010013FA  mov         byte ptr [ebp+eax-78h],0
    010013FF  mov         ecx,dword ptr [ebp-0Ch]   <<< UPDATE i
    01001402  add         ecx,1
    01001405  mov         dword ptr [ebp-0Ch],ecx
    01001408  jmp         wmain+51h (10013F1h)      <<< UNCOND JUMP
  }

// "DO-WHILE" LOOP:

i = 0;
.  0100140A  mov         dword ptr [ebp-0Ch],0
  do
  {
      x[i++] = 0;
    01001411  mov         eax,dword ptr [ebp-0Ch]   <<< DO THE JOB..
    01001414  mov         byte ptr [ebp+eax-78h],0
    01001419  mov         ecx,dword ptr [ebp-0Ch]   <<< UPDATE i
    0100141C  add         ecx,1
    0100141F  mov         dword ptr [ebp-0Ch],ecx
    01001422  cmp         dword ptr [ebp-0Ch],64h   <<< TEST
    01001426  jl          wmain+71h (1001411h)      <<< COND JUMP
  }
  while (i<100);

Solution 3:

For the sake of readability

Solution 4:

They're all interchangeable; you could pick one type and use nothing but that forever, but usually one is more convenient for a given task. It's like saying "why have switch, you can just use a bunch of if statements" -- true, but if it's a common pattern to check a variable for a set of values, it's convenient and much easier to read if there's a language feature to do that

Solution 5:

If you want a loop to execute while a condition is true, and not for a certain number of iterations, it is much easier for someone else to understand:

while (cond_true)

than something like this:

for (; cond_true ; )