🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <41hsls$or@aadt.sdt.com> hawkins@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_GATEWAY_FILE (Tony Hawkins) writes:
> Whats needed is a construct which 
>clearly limits the 'scope' of the label to within the outer loop
>and to breaks only.  Something like the following:
>
>
>   for iLoop: (i=0;i<10;i++)
>     {
>     for(j=0;j<10;j++)
>       {
>       /*  some other code here to set condition */
>       if(condition) break iLoop;
>       } 
>     }

   I quite like this,  esp. if there was an equivalent 'continue iLoop'
construct available,  such that the label is available to break/continue.
And yes,  control flow would have to be limited towards outer loops.

   If these were available,  then we could have 'break label' from
switch/for/while,  and 'continue label' from for/while.

   As it is at the moment,  I usually end up coding constructs like that
as functions which return true/false values and then doing the
break/continue based upon the return value.  Unfortunatly this can end
up making the code harder to follow.

DF
-- 
Derek Fawcus (G7FVS)                                df@eyrie.demon.co.uk