OpenEuphoria

Re: New keyword added: continue

• Posted by Jeremy Cowgar <jeremy at cow?ar?com> May 11, 2008
• 784 views

Derek Parnell wrote:
> 
> But aren't we supposed to be learning from the mistakes of the past?
>

Hm. #1, I'm not entirely sure continue is a mistake. #2, there is nothing
inherently evil about continue and tradition should carry quite a bit of weight
in this area. If there was a major flaw, then we should learn but I'm not seeing
a huge flaw.

Again, please understand, I'm just playing the "devils advocate" trying to
promote a healthy debate about it. That's how we will do a service to Euphoria,
however, I *think* I am on the side of continue, but am waffling. However, the
debate is far from over.

I do think it's possible, that if we choose next, in the future we may look back
on things and treat the decision of going to next as one of those things in the
past we should learn a lesson from.

Another thought that just came to my mind is there is great talk about being
able to embed Euphoria into C and use Euphoria as a scripting language to extend
existing C applications. If that happens, we will have more and more C
programmers using Euphoria. Thus, that should bear a *little* (probably not a
lot) weight in the decision of next/continue.

Probably what we should do is collect pro's and con's, then create a summary of
those on the wiki. Then reference the wiki and make a decision.

So, any pro's and con's out there people want to have recorded that has not
already been said?

For continue, 
pros:
  1. standard
cons:
  1. what does it mean?

For next,
pros:
  1. meaning is clearer (next iteration)
cons:
1. use is common in variable names or function names (i.e. any iterator, list,
  database connection, etc...)
  2. not standard or traditional
3. conflicts with other common languages such as basic, VBA, ASP (yes, all
  Microsoft).

--
Jeremy Cowgar
http://jeremy.cowgar.com