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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,7596cfba54ad3207
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-07-04 02:03:03 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!oleane.net!oleane!teaser.fr!enst!enst.fr!not-for-mail
From: "Grein, Christoph" <christoph.grein@eurocopter.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Trivial Ada question
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 10:59:30 +0200 (MET DST)
Organization: ENST, France
Sender: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org
Message-ID: <mailman.1025773383.11604.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
Reply-To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin.enst.fr
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: avanie.enst.fr 1025773383 46634 137.194.161.2 (4 Jul 2002 09:03:03
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@enst.fr
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 09:03:03 +0000 (UTC)
Return-Path: <christoph.grein@eurocopter.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: mail.eurocopter.com: uucp set sender to
 <christoph.grein@eurocopter.com> using -f
Content-MD5: PV4aFczGBi7pBRb/zS95gA==
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4u sparc 
Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org
X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11
Precedence: bulk
X-Reply-To: "Grein, Christoph" <christoph.grein@eurocopter.com>
List-Help: <mailto:comp.lang.ada-request@ada.eu.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://ada.eu.org/mailman/listinfo/comp.lang.ada>,
	<mailto:comp.lang.ada-request@ada.eu.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: comp.lang.ada mail<->news gateway <comp.lang.ada.ada.eu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://ada.eu.org/mailman/listinfo/comp.lang.ada>,
	<mailto:comp.lang.ada-request@ada.eu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org
X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26856
Date: 2002-07-04T10:59:30+02:00

> * Darren New wrote:
> >"Robert I. Eachus" wrote:

[I do not remeber the exact form of Eachus', it was something like the 
following:]

  for i in A'Range loop
    if not condition (A (i)) then
      goto Dont_Increment;
    end if;
  end loop;
  n := n + 1;
  <<Dont_Increment>>

> >> Notice that a
> >> compiler might generate identical code for these two examples.  What
> >> makes one right and the other wrong?
> >
> >Because the compiler isn't the only one that reads the code?
> >
> >"exit when ..." says to leave the innermost loop.
> >"goto skip" doesn't tell you anything about what "skip" means.
> 
> So simply write:
> 
>   INCREMENT: for dummy in 1 .. 1 loop
>     for i in a'Range loop
>       exit INCREMENT when condition (a (i));
>     end loop;
>     n := n + 1;
>   end loop;
> 
> No 'evil' goto, and a 'telling' label.

This was a joke, wasn't it? Is this really better than a simle and innocent and 
nearby goto? A one-time 'loop' enclosing another work loop...

These goto wars are astounding. Event the most simple goto solution is replaced 
by a contrived no-goto one!

I have to confess that I have not needed a goto in so many years, but the goto 
solution is one of the simplest solutions of all 
those presented.