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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fac41,9a0ff0bffdf63657
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,9a0ff0bffdf63657
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
X-Google-Thread: f43e6,9a0ff0bffdf63657
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,4b06f8f15f01a568
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: ell@access.digex.net (Ell)
Subject: Re: Software landmines (loops)
Date: 1998/09/01
Message-ID: <35ed3d4a.2378710@news.erols.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 386615044
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <dewar.903281994@merv> <6r9f8h$jtm$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
 <6renh8$ga7$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6rf59b$2ud$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
 <l5HC1.6840$wN.1856764@news.giganews.com> <6rfra4$rul$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
 <35DBDD24.D003404D@calfp.co.uk> <m3ogt3qgca.fsf@mheaney.ni.net>
 <6sbuod$fra$1@hirame.wwa.com> <35f51e53.48044143@news.erols.com>
 <6sdiav$e0g$1@hirame.wwa.com> <u90k5f1j1.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov>
 <6sfcft$70p$1@hirame.wwa.com> <6sfcu4$bks@saluki-news.it.siu.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com
X-Trace: winter.news.erols.com 904609656 19949 207.172.33.50 (1 Sep 1998
 00:27:36 GMT)
Organization: Universe
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: ell@access.digex.net
Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-09-01T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Agent" <agent@siu.edu> wrote:

>Robert Martin wrote in message <6sfcft$70p$1@hirame.wwa.com>...
>>Stephen Leake wrote in message ...
>>>If there is only one 'exit' statement, why is this bad?
>>>
>>>loop
>>>    ... stuff
>>>    exit when ;
>>>    ... stuff
>>>end loop;
>>>
>>>One entry, one exit. Perfectly clear. There's nothing magic about
>>>putting the exit statement at the top or the bottom!
>>
>>In fact there is.  If the exit condition is at the top or the bottom,
>then
>>the body of the loop will always be excuted an exact integral number of
>>times.  However if the loop condition is in the middle, then the loop
>body
>>will be executed a fractional number of times.

So what?  Big deal.  It's *not* non-intuitive, unreadable, hard to
maintain spaghetti code (even less so with comments), and that's all
that *really* matters.  *Those* are the key issues, not blind bondage
in some imaginary stockade of dogmatic pain.

Elliott

>There are two "loop bodies" in this case.  The upper body will be
>executed n times, and the lower body will be executed n-1 times.  It is
>a little more difficult to keep track of, but mid-decision loops *are*
>useful; Knuth thinks so, anyway, and I agree based on my own
>experiences.
>
>-- Agent
>

-- 
   :=***=:  Objective  *  Pre-code Modelling  *  Holistic  :=***=:
                 Hallmarks of the best SW Engineering
         "The domain object model is the foundation of OOD."
 Check out SW Modeller vs SW Craftite Central : www.access.digex.net/~ell
   Copyright 1998 Elliott. exclusive of others' writing. may be copied
     without permission only in the comp.* usenet and bitnet groups.