3 ms·
It works perfectly fine for size = 0?
by layer8 3mo ago
It works perfectly fine for size = 0?
- xigoi 3mo agoThey meant x = 0.
- layer8 3mo agoNot sure if they meant that, since the “awful” was referring to the original loop that had no x, but the generic solution in that case is: for (size_t i = size; i—- > x;)
- StellarScience 3mo ago[dead]