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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,459feef56669b92d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-11-03 08:49:46 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!small1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!border3.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!intern1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp.comcast.com!news.comcast.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 10:49:43 -0600
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 11:49:42 -0500
From: "Robert I. Eachus" <rieachus@comcast.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: "continue/next" for "loop"
References: <mailman.261.1067864193.25614.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
 <slrnbqckoa.m1.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de> <bo5l0g$f2n$1@news.uni-stuttgart.de>
In-Reply-To: <bo5l0g$f2n$1@news.uni-stuttgart.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <GaOdnQutOP61GjuiRVn-hQ@comcast.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.34.214.193
X-Trace: 
 sv3-C4WBrdwe/8joxDzvyBf4PfCcmgzF1xYzYiZVxHaeGfH1oXVE8XlCebt4Tf86XVIL2JJu+3a7UARnGdy!SzIXg/Vb16yeMwQwo3C5P4B71lO1SF28Mlk3qYUO8JoW8za054w0tMRp3+9zaA==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: dmca@comcast.net
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint
 properly
X-Postfilter: 1.1
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1998
Date: 2003-11-03T11:49:42-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Peter Hermann wrote:

> assuming the number of keywords 69 constant,
> we could imagine these:

I actually think we are going to get one or two new reserved words in 
Ada 200X.

> goto loop [loopid];
> 
> or
> 
> exit [loopid] not [when ...];

But I think in the case of loops, there are clearly two specialized 
forms of goto that should be considered:

goto exit; -- exit innermost enclosing loop.
exit loop; -- alternative syntax. ;-)

and

goto end; -- skip to start of next loop iteration.
goto loop;
goto begin;

For the first case, I think that "exit loop" is probably the preferred 
notation.  It really is a goto in disguise, but one that need not be 
prohibited by those coding standards that prohibit gotos. ;-)

For the second, I am not sure whether "goto loop" or "goto end" is 
better.  In either case it really is a goto.  Other possibilities 
include "goto for" and "goto while," but this construct will IMHO often 
be used in loops with no for or while clauses.

Back to the earlier discussion about "with and use,"  I think that "exit 
loop" and "goto loop," if added to the language would clearly enhance 
readability and maintainability.



-- 
 
Robert I. Eachus

100% Ada, no bugs--the only way to create software.