From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,81bb2ce65a3240c3
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.204.129.15 with SMTP id m15mr477687bks.2.1335386520527;
        Wed, 25 Apr 2012 13:42:00 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 h15ni165284bkw.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Adam Beneschan <adam@irvine.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What would you like in Ada202X?
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 13:40:01 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <30695328.1199.1335386401806.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yndm3>
References: <3637793.35.1335340026327.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynfi5>
 <31103380.3735.1335377235157.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbuo17>
 <26317529.742.1335381313996.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynje10>
 <17572718.3572.1335384748259.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbbfk16>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1335386520 6889 127.0.0.1 (25 Apr 2012 20:42:00
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:42:00 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: 
 <17572718.3572.1335384748259.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbbfk16>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=66.126.103.122;
 posting-account=duW0ogkAAABjRdnxgLGXDfna0Gc6XqmQ
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: 2012-04-25T13:40:01-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Wednesday, April 25, 2012 1:12:28 PM UTC-7, okel...@users.sourceforge.ne=
t wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 25, 2012 9:15:13 PM UTC+2, Adam Beneschan wrote:
> >=20
> > And why would having a "continue" statement be better than the workarou=
nd? =20
>=20
> Conciseness, plus avoidance of gratuitous "goto" (banned by various codin=
g guidelines)

This is the sort of thing that makes me want to cry.  There's a reason "got=
o" is banned from some coding guidelines, and it's not because one day Dijk=
stra came down from a mountain with a slab that said "Thou shalt not use go=
to".  It's banned because in most cases, using it negatively impacts readab=
ility and (as Jeff said) there's almost always a better way.  I've tried to=
 argue here that using "continue" is worse for readability than using a "go=
to" in this case--so if I'm right, it would make no sense to have coding gu=
idelines that disallow "goto" and allow "continue".  Of course, if you're a=
ble to argue that the "continue" is more readable in this case, please do s=
o.  But I suspect that's not possible if ...


> > [...] With a "continue" statement, I might be looking at the loop and g=
oing
> > nuts trying to figure out "I know this loop is cycling back, and these =
last
> > two statements should be executed before the end of the loop because th=
ey're
> > not inside an IF statement, so they should be calling this routine, but=
 it
> > seems like it's not being called--why??"
>=20
> I'm not sure what you mean.

... the entire issue of readability is beyond your understanding.

                      -- Adam