On Friday, 17 March 2017 at 11:30:48 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, March 17, 2017 01:55:19 Hussien via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
I tend to agree with this. If the foreach is static, and
continue and break are just going to be ignored, then they
should just be illegal. Allowing them is just going to confuse
people. Now, making it so that they actually work statically
has some interesting possibilities, but that would fall apart
as soon as you have any constructs that would use continue or
break (e.g. a loop or switch statement) inside the static
foreach, and it might break code in rare cases. So, we're
probably better off just making them illegal. But having them
be legal just seems disingenious, since they don't do anything.
- Jonathan M Davis
What exactly IS happening in the case of a continue in a
static-if? I could sort of imagine that maybe if you were
expecting the loop to be unrolled, that you then have a continue
statement in the correct part of the unrolled loop. But I take it
this isn't what's happening?
