Re: EOF and GOTO and 0th array element
- Posted by Kat <gertie at PELL.NET> Aug 25, 2002
- 508 views
On 25 Aug 2002, at 10:44, Igor Kachan wrote: > > Hello Juergen, Hello Derek, > > > Îò: Juergen Luethje <jluethje at gmx.de> > > Êîìó: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com> > > Òåìà: Re: EOF and GOTO and 0th array element > > Äàòà: 23 àâãóñòà 2002 ã. 23:20 > > > > Derek <ddparnell at bigpond.com> wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > I will argue against the "exit n" idea for > > > a number of reasons. > > > The first reason is that over time, the value > > > of 'n' might change as > > > modifications change the nesting level > > > of the 'exit' statement. > > <snip> > > This 'n' must be considered if it is 3 or more. > > For 1 and 2, there are the simple old good > standard antispaghetti EU constructions, > for example: > > procedure loop() > while x do > -- code 1 > while y do > -- code 2 > if a then return -- = exit 2 > else exit -- = exit 1 > end if > -- code 3 > end while > -- code 4 > if b then exit > end if > end while > end procedure > > So, the question is - how frequently we use > 3 and more nested loops - as a reason to > implement exit n. > > This question has to have a simple answer - > let us search through 930+ archive packages > to find this too deep loops' percentage. > > But I am too too lazy to search and to struggle > for this >=3 new feature in the interpreter, > sorry please, OK? > > Who wants? NOT ME. I prefer the simple goto you already did. Kat