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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.jrcarter.not@spam.not.acm.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: stopping a loop iteration without exiting it
Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 10:59:45 +0100
Organization: Also freenews.netfront.net; news.tornevall.net;
 news.eternal-september.org
Message-ID: <p2q6mh$n3$1@dont-email.me>
References: <bc57c2d8-ed05-4e8b-b7db-440984976364@googlegroups.com>
 <81971548-23c9-4927-a6a8-6f0f1dba896b@googlegroups.com>
 <p2jhdl$da4$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk> <wccr2r6ttuh.fsf@TheWorld.com>
 <p2kufi$f1l$1@dont-email.me> <867esx70lw.fsf@gaheris.avalon.lan>
 <p2ntsm$pad$1@dont-email.me> <86373k74qh.fsf@gaheris.avalon.lan>
 <p2o55r$b5g$1@dont-email.me> <87shbki0et.fsf@nightsong.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 09:59:45 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="b6cb98f9beb8b17aca944719a16aeeb4";
	logging-data="739"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/91shdYNq6ogxggFpkGRyRdb+yy3GFxE0="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.5.0
In-Reply-To: <87shbki0et.fsf@nightsong.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Cancel-Lock: sha1:4ak6C9UGvDY419PkqZaoYWbNF70=
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:49783
Date: 2018-01-06T10:59:45+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 01/05/2018 08:13 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> 
> If a construct is useful, then the existence of an ugly workaround for
> its absence doesn't make it non-useful.  Of course it's not "needed"; as
> Mart van de Wege says, you could use GOTO for everything so none of it
> is needed.  The question is whether it improves code readability,
> reliability, developer productivity, etc.

When I say "needed", I of course mean needed to make the code significantly 
simpler or clearer than code without the "continue". In fact, my experience has 
been the opposite: excluding the majority of uses, which are equivalent to an 
"if" and are equivalent in simplicity and clearness, the real-world examples 
I've seen where people wanted or used a "continue" were simpler and clearer when 
reworked to avoid the "continue".

I'm willing to accept that there are cases where the construct would result in 
simpler or clearer code. People have claimed to have such cases, but I have not 
seen them. But based on my experience, there is no need for such a feature.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"What's the amount of the insult?"
Never Give a Sucker an Even Break
104