> Iterative loops are much easier to analyze and reason about, by humans and by computers. For example, they always terminate. It's a bit of an apples-to-orang

> Iterative loops are much easier to analyze and reason about, by humans and by computers. For example, they always terminate. It's a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison to compare (proper, bounded) for-loops to general recursion. A more appropriate question would be whether humans and computers find, say, primitive recursion or structural recursion easier to analyse and reason about than for-loops. The difference between general- and primitive-recursion becomes very apparent when working in Coq, for example!