On Mon, 2002-02-25 at 10:47, Simon Cozens wrote:
> given (...) {
> ...
> break;
> for (...) {
> ...
> last;
> Same concept, different keyword. Good idea?
Larry pointed this out. His reasoning was that given isn't exactly a
loop construct to the user. I know that I'm more inclined to think of it
as a sort of "if-like construct". Given that if doesn't pay any
attention to last, I'm not sure that given should.
OTOH... introducing a new keyword is heavy stuff. Perhaps it would be
good to have the last/next/redo/continue syntax be the same as for
loops.
I defer to others for that call.
