Re: Exit(n) vs. goto
- Posted by Euler German <efgerman at myrealbox.com> Feb 18, 2002
- 481 views
Of course not! As a matter of fact, only now I realize that you answered me personally. Be my guest, Derek. Cheers, -- Euler On 18 Feb 2002, at 15:21, Derek Parnell wrote: > Euler, > I hope you don't mind me publishing your question in the Eu forum. > > 18/02/2002 2:15:28 PM, "Euler German" wrote: > > >would be possible to have as much identified loops as > >we need? I mean, to handle situations when we could use a total, a mid > >term and a simple (not identified) exit. > > Why not? I would not like to break any existing code so loop labels > would have to be optional. Also, any loop could have a label. I suspect > that the loop identifier should only be scoped to the containing routine > (or file if its not in a routine). Though it might be argued that the > scope should only be to the identifier loop and nested loops, similar to > the automatic index variable in FOR loops. > > for i = 1 to width do:bAcross > . . . > for j = 1 to Height do:bDown > . . . > if a then exit bAcross end if > . . . > while c do:bAnalysis > . . . > if b then exit bDown end if > if d then exit bAcross end if > . . . > end bAnalysis > . . . > end bDown > . . . > end bAcross > > -------- > Derek > >