Hi Fred,
I think you have discovered a potential short-coming in the compiler.
The intention is to mostly follow Java behavior.
A "break someLabel" statement should break out of an enclosed
statement having label "someLabel" (A) or the current
for/while/do/switch if no label is given (B). If an unknown label is
given, there should be a compile error (C). Currently, if the label is
known but not in the "Java correct" scope, we are getting (B) instead
of (C). So, it's not actually doing a GOTO "exit" in your example but
is exiting the "for".
int i = 5
for (int j=0; j<2; j++) { break exit }
i += 10
exit:
i += 100
assert i == 115
However, "continue exit" is actually doing a goto to "exit".
The code was written before my time, I'll have to dive in further to
work out if this is a feature or bug. The code does seem to be giving
more flexibility than what Java would do. It is probably worth
creating an issue so that we can follow through whether we have the
correct behavior. I'd recommend in the meantime following Java style,
that should give the behavior Java folks would expect with the current
implementation and would not change if we removed the current extra
flexibility.
Cheers, Paul.
On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 7:55 AM Fred Eisele <fredrick.eis...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I am seeing some inconsistency in the documentation for use of breaking to
> labels.
>
> This indicates that groovy works similar to fortran, goto label.
> https://groovy-lang.org/semantics.html#_labeled_statements
>
> for (int j=0;j<i;j++) {
> println "j=$j"
> if (j == 5) { break exit }
> }
> exit: println "i=$i"
>
>
> In other places it sounds more like java.
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6126702/java-groovy-double-for-statement-question
>
> outerLoop:
> for (...) {
> for (...) {
> if (...) {
> break outerLoop;
> }
> }
> }
