OpenEuphoria

Re: Changes to Euphoria

• Posted by Lucius L. Hilley III <euphoria at unkma?.co?> May 30, 2008
• 688 views

ken mortenson wrote:
> 
> Thoughts inspired by Jason and Jeremy's discussion...
<SNIP>
> while (1)
>    ...
> end while
> 
> I would claim that quicker comprehension occurs with this construct...
> 
> Loop
>    ...
> End Loop
> 
<SNIP>
> 
> What about FOR.  What does FOR add to the game that LOOP doesn't give you
> already?  FOR gives you an INDEX.  What a great idea.  But perhaps
> if a minimalist were trying to add an implicit INDEX he or she might have
> realized you don't need to add FOR at all!
> 
> Loop from 10 by 5
>    ...
> End Loop
> 
<SNIP>

1) You suggestion looks nice, Yet incomplete.
   Explained below:
2) Replacing or Removing the current while and for
   loop structures will make virtually all break
   virtually every current euphoria program.

Incomplete Explained:
    You don't show using the index values.
Someone suggested or assumed that it would be Loop.
Thusly: 

Loop from 1 by 1
  ? Loop
End Loop

The problem is with nested Loops.

for iy = 1 to 5 do
  for ix = 1 to 5 do
    print(1, {iy, ix})
  enf for
  puts(1, 10)
end for

    Best Regards,
    Lucius L. Hilley III - Unkmar