On Wednesday, 4 November 2015 at 00:23:59 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 11/3/15 3:12 PM, Shammah Chancellor wrote:
So, I think that static foreach *cannot* support break and
continue as
same as foreach with tuples.
Kenji Hara
Ditto. This needs `static continue` and `static break`.
Without this
functionality, the control flow in `static foreach` becomes
very unwieldy.
There's no reason technical or otherwise to require "static"
with continue/break in static foreach. -- Andrei
I'm not sure that I agree with you. However, in the latest DMD
it appears that named break/continues work with foreach over
tuples now. So, I'll rescind my statement regarding separating
compile-time control flow vs runtime control flow.
-Shammah
