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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.107.142.84 with SMTP id q81mr7521567iod.51.1515373094252; Sun, 07 Jan 2018 16:58:14 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.157.94.6 with SMTP id d6mr478133oti.12.1515373093849; Sun, 07 Jan 2018 16:58:13 -0800 (PST) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!gandalf.srv.welterde.de!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!i6no1441554itb.0!news-out.google.com!b73ni4652ita.0!nntp.google.com!i6no1441550itb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 16:58:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <689a3bd0-c2fc-42ff-8c64-041a5045d8ac@googlegroups.com> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2601:193:4101:1b33:b986:7e58:5c7:fc72; posting-account=1tLBmgoAAAAfy5sC3GUezzrpVNronPA- NNTP-Posting-Host: 2601:193:4101:1b33:b986:7e58:5c7:fc72 References: <689a3bd0-c2fc-42ff-8c64-041a5045d8ac@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: stopping a loop iteration without exiting it From: Matt Borchers Injection-Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2018 00:58:14 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:49808 Date: 2018-01-07T16:58:13-08:00 List-Id: On Sunday, January 7, 2018 at 6:33:42 AM UTC-5, Mehdi Saada wrote: > If order is signifiant, how about putting the common part in a procedure,= and calling it after or before the specific part, in each of the "whens" ? Yes, one could do that. My first post in this thread wasn't about how to c= ode within the bounds of the current syntax. Rather it was how a programme= r 'might' avoid creating extraneous variables and sub-programs to overcome = these types of issues when alternative syntactical forms exist. Don't get = me wrong though, I love Ada.