Peter Dalgaard <p.dalgaard <at> biostat.ku.dk> writes:
:
: Gabor Grothendieck <ggrothendieck <at> myway.com> writes:
:
: > Should the 'for' loop in the following example not return 3 rather than 2?
: > The Language Manual says that it returns the result of the last evaluated
: > statement and that would be the i before the 'break'. 'repeat' and 'while'
: > have the same behavior.
: >
: > R> (for(i in 1:10) if (i==3) { i; break } else i)
: > [1] 2
:
: Hmmm... First, let's look at some variants:
:
: > (for(i in 1:10) {pi; if (i==3) { i; break } else 123})
: [1] 123
:
: Notice that you're getting neither "2" nor "3.1415926", but the "123"
: from the previous iteration. Similarly
:
: > (for(i in 1:10) {pi; if (i==3) { i; break }else 123; 456})
: [1] 456
:
: So you are getting the result of the last _completely_ evaluated
: statement (the enclosing "{"-statement is not completed either).
:
This seems undesirable behavior to me. The prototypical example
of this is searching for something and then returning it.
I think break should be more like return:
for (i in 1:10) if (i==3) { i; break } else i # returns 3
for(i in 1:10) if (i==3) break(i) else i # same
______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
