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 10.68.230.98 with SMTP id sx2mr143673pbc.1.1335407624249;
        Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:33:44 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Path: 
 r9ni99055pbh.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!newsfeed.x-privat.org!news.jacob-sparre.dk!munin.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What would you like in Ada202X?
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 21:33:37 -0500
Organization: Jacob Sparre Andersen Research & Innovation
Message-ID: <jnac65$vmt$1@munin.nbi.dk>
References: <3637793.35.1335340026327.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynfi5>
 <31103380.3735.1335377235157.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbuo17>
NNTP-Posting-Host: static-69-95-181-76.mad.choiceone.net
X-Trace: munin.nbi.dk 1335407622 32477 69.95.181.76 (26 Apr 2012 02:33:42 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 02:33:42 +0000 (UTC)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157
Date: 2012-04-25T21:33:37-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

<okellogg@users.sourceforge.net> wrote in message 
news:31103380.3735.1335377235157.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbuo17...
> On Wednesday, April 25, 2012 9:47:06 AM UTC+2, Martin wrote:
>> Ok, we don't officially have Ada2012 yet but as no new features are going
>> to be added to it, now seems like a good time to start thinking about the
>> next revision.
>
> It's been said before but I'll say it again:
> A "continue" statement for quick jump to end of loop body.

We had this discussion in the context of Ada 2012, and...

> I've seen this worked around as follows:

It's not a "work-around". It's how it's done in Ada. The Ada standard is not 
in the business of catering to those who have clueless programming style 
guides (or the clueless management that emposed them).

Note that there are at least as many people that do not want additional ways 
to transfer control (they think there are too many as it is). The e-mail in 
AI05-0179-1 gives some insight into this.

>   loop
>      if Some_Condition then
>         goto Continue;
>      end if;
>      --  a couple 100 statements later ...
>     <<Continue>> null;
>   end loop;

The "null;" is not needed here in Ada 2012 (as it is just noise here); a 
label goes between statements including at the begining and end. (Earlier 
versions of Ada required a label to be on a statement, which lead to the 
useless "null".)

   loop
      if Some_Condition then
         goto Continue;
      end if;
      --  a couple 100 statements later ...
     <<Continue>>
   end loop;

                                         Randy.