On Monday, 17 July 2017 at 12:38:27 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On 7/16/17 1:04 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 7/16/17 9:10 AM, Mike Parker wrote:
Congratulations to Timon Gehr. Not only was his "Static
foreach" DIP accepted, it picked up a good deal of praise
from Walter & Andrei.
Indeed. Kudos to Timon (and thanks Mike for driving the
process). This is a well done DIP that many others could draw
inspiration from. -- Andrei
What is the resolution of how break statements affect static
foreach/foreach?
i.e. this section:
"As some consider this to be potentially confusing, it has been
suggested that break and continue directly inside static
foreach should instead be compiler errors and require explicit
labels. This DIP leaves this decision to the language authors,
but recommends the above semantics."
-Steve
static break & static continue anyone?
