Hmmm... some discussion generated on this subject, but fairly light. I
take that as an indicator that an Celse on loops is a fairly popular
idea. The other possibilities are that b) people don't want any form of
else on loops and aren't saying so or c) people simply don't care,
but silence and
On Sat, Apr 27, 2002 at 05:20:06AM -0500, Allison Randal wrote:
Hmmm... some discussion generated on this subject, but fairly light. I
take that as an indicator that an Celse on loops is a fairly popular
idea. The other possibilities are that b) people don't want any form of
else on loops
On Sat, Apr 27, 2002 at 10:53:09PM +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
Allison wrote:
And the discussion of scope led to (what I think is) an interesting
tidbit on NAMED blocks...
Which I presume was that the proposed usage:
while $result.get_next() - $next {
# do something with
Allison wrote:
This leads me to conclude that a normal (trailing, un-nested) Celse
is a much more reasonable construct for a Cwhile -- and at least
arguable for a Cfor.
And Cloop, I hope.
Sure. I always think of a Cloop as just a Cwhile with delusions of
grandeur. ;-)
Of course, one
Allison Randal wrote:
Hmmm... some discussion generated on this subject, but fairly light. I
take that as an indicator that an Celse on loops is a fairly popular
idea. The other possibilities are that b) people don't want any form of
else on loops and aren't saying so or c) people simply
On Sat, Apr 27, 2002 at 12:50:49PM +0200, Paul Johnson wrote:
Here's another possibility. People trust Larry to get it right and
don't feel the need to weigh in with opinions.
I trust Larry. That's actually why I feel free to play the devil's
advocate. I trust him to toss the dross and
