Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Raymond Hettinger wrote: > > More than case-statement semantics or PEP343, I wish for a dowhile > > statement. > > > > The most straight-forward way is to put the conditional expression at > > the beginning of the block with the understanding that a dowhile keyword > > will evaluate the condition only after the block runs > > Out-of-order code execution rarely counts as 'straightforward' ;) > > With PEP 315, a do-while loop would look like: > > do: > <body> > while <cond>: > pass > > But then, I'm reasonably happy with the 'break out of an infinite > loop' approach, so *shrug*.
PEP 315 offers the creation/use of an additional keyword. It also happens to push the condition to the end of the loop body. I'm not sure that pushing condition evaluation to the end of the loop body (with a trailing 'pass' as provided) is necessarily more readable than Raymond's offered dowhile. In fact, if I remember the discussion over decorators correctly, putting an operation later actually reduces readability, though at least in this case, the bare "do:" would signal to the user "Hey, I have a condition later!" Though we again run into, how is that any better than having the condition at the front to begin with, especially if a new keyword is necessary regardless of the resulting syntax? - Josiah _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
