On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 01:11:34 +0300, BCS <[email protected]> wrote:
Reply to Nick,
I had never heard of that before, but it certainly seems like
something I'd find useful. Any time I'm using for or foreach to find
something, I end up having to use some sort of "isFound" flag and
check that after the loop. A for...else would be much nicer, for
example:
[...]
// vs:
foreach(char[] key, Foo f; fooAA)
{
if(f.someFlag && key in barAA && f.someVal > barAA[key].someVal)
break; // found
}
else
Stdout.formatln("Missing!");
Wait, that's not the way I would expect else to work. You (and and it
would seem python) would have the else clause run if the loop is
terminated by the for/foreach rater than a break/goto. I would expect
that the else clause would be executed if the loop is terminated before
the first iteration.
I think your expectation would be a good feature but I can't really see
else being the right keyword to use. How about "finally"? Or another
option with scope(*) like "fallthrough"?
Same here, I expected the for/else pair to work similar to if/else, i.e. only
one of the branches to be executed.
Perhaps I could get used to the syntax, though.
