Talk:Loops/Continue: Difference between revisions
m (moved Talk:Loop/Continue to Talk:Loops/Continue) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
Isn't this a poor example of continue, since it is so easily completed using an if-else instead? How about a task which is more of an 'early-exit' sort of situation? --[[User:Kevin Reid|Kevin Reid]] 16:40, 16 May 2009 (UTC) |
Isn't this a poor example of continue, since it is so easily completed using an if-else instead? How about a task which is more of an 'early-exit' sort of situation? --[[User:Kevin Reid|Kevin Reid]] 16:40, 16 May 2009 (UTC) |
||
:"Early exit" sounds more like break to me. The task says to force the next iteration. I think that's enough. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 16:45, 16 May 2009 (UTC) |
:"Early exit" sounds more like break to me. The task says to force the next iteration. I think that's enough. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 16:45, 16 May 2009 (UTC) |
||
== Fortran 77! == |
|||
Fortran 77 can do this loop (as well as most of the others), but it cannot print without creating a newline. Some compilers have their own way of doing that, but it is simply not a feature in the ANSI FORTRAN 77 standard. On the other hand, F77 basically doesn't have loops, so I feel examples of rigged-up loops would be particularly helpful. If I am going to post examples, they will either (a) not meet your program specifications or (b) not meet ANSI's specifications. |
|||
For the former, I'd probably use a double-newline or something to indicate the difference. For the latter, I'd post a warning about that feature and indicate nonstandard code. |
|||
Personally, I feel it would be better to go with the latter because, in this specific case, we are talking about literally one nonstandard character. But I defer to your judgment. --[[User:Maaatt|Maaatt]] 19:24, 15 April 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 19:24, 15 April 2011
Modula-3
Was the Modula-3 example supposed to have the word "RAISE" in it somewhere? --Mwn3d 20:54, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Er, whoops, meant to write RETURN, fixed now :P --Mbishop 21:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't this made more explicit?
The task asks just for an output, does not force nor suggest how to achieve it. Yes, one can take a look at written example, but if all we need is to compliant to task requirements, than the Loop/Continue feature could be missed! Shouldn't the task contain a sentence like "forcing the next iteration within the loop"? So I've done it (I'm feeling bold in modifying the wiki today:D) --ShinTakezou 11:54, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Poor example?
Isn't this a poor example of continue, since it is so easily completed using an if-else instead? How about a task which is more of an 'early-exit' sort of situation? --Kevin Reid 16:40, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- "Early exit" sounds more like break to me. The task says to force the next iteration. I think that's enough. --Mwn3d 16:45, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Fortran 77!
Fortran 77 can do this loop (as well as most of the others), but it cannot print without creating a newline. Some compilers have their own way of doing that, but it is simply not a feature in the ANSI FORTRAN 77 standard. On the other hand, F77 basically doesn't have loops, so I feel examples of rigged-up loops would be particularly helpful. If I am going to post examples, they will either (a) not meet your program specifications or (b) not meet ANSI's specifications.
For the former, I'd probably use a double-newline or something to indicate the difference. For the latter, I'd post a warning about that feature and indicate nonstandard code.
Personally, I feel it would be better to go with the latter because, in this specific case, we are talking about literally one nonstandard character. But I defer to your judgment. --Maaatt 19:24, 15 April 2011 (UTC)