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=0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA autolearn=no 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 10.204.141.4 with SMTP id k4mr469490bku.6.1335385173468; Wed, 25 Apr 2012 13:19:33 -0700 (PDT) Path: h15ni165214bkw.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.datemas.de!news.tornevall.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Jeffrey Carter Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: What would you like in Ada202X? Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 13:19:19 -0700 Organization: TornevallNET - http://news.tornevall.net Message-ID: 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> NNTP-Posting-Host: fd2179a32e23dca51fb45cd1fa3f05ae Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: 731e23cfed0669a68a962828befa801b X-Complaints-To: abuse@tornevall.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120329 Thunderbird/11.0.1 X-Complaints-Language: Spoken language is english or swedish - NOT ITALIAN, FRENCH, GERMAN OR ANY OTHER LANGUAGE! In-Reply-To: <26317529.742.1335381313996.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynje10> X-UserIDNumber: 1738 X-Validate-Post: http://news.tornevall.net/validate.php?trace=731e23cfed0669a68a962828befa801b X-Complaints-Italiano: Non abbiamo padronanza della lingua italiana - se mandate una email scrivete solo in Inglese, grazie X-Posting-User: 0243687135df8c4b260dd4a9a93c79bd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: 2012-04-25T13:19:19-07:00 List-Id: On 04/25/2012 12:15 PM, Adam Beneschan wrote: > > And why would having a "continue" statement be better than the workaround? > If I'm looking at a loop like this, and I see a<> label at the > end, then I know that I can't count on the last however-many statements in > the loop being executed before the loop loops back, because there's probably > a branch to the label somewhere else in the loop. With a "continue" > statement, I might be looking at the loop and going 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 they're not inside an IF > statement, so they should be calling this routine, but it seems like it's not > being called--why??" Trust me, I've had this exact experience. When I was > programming in C I made the decision never to use this statement. I've never used such a statement or the go-to equivalent. There's always a better way. It's interesting to note that Ratfor has the "next" statement to do this, but in 321 pages in /Software Tools/, Kernighan and Plauger never use it. -- Jeff Carter "Ada has made you lazy and careless. You can write programs in C that are just as safe by the simple application of super-human diligence." E. Robert Tisdale 72