Re: Re[2]: why no "continue" statement for loops?

[Asko Kauppi <asko.kauppi@...>]

I'm sceptical about break N as well (for the same reasons).

Adding 'continue' would be sort-of "beautiful" since it would make the 
language orthogonal (is that the right word - meaning having the full 
of something, instead of just half of it).

Actually, i added "continue patch" to the upcoming gluax releases, so 
that variant will be having it in the future.

.ak


Tuomo Valkonen kirjoittaa maanantaina, 23. kesäkuuta 2003, kello 16:27:

> On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 07:35:24PM +0900, Dylan Cuthbert wrote:
> > I second this break <n> continue <n>  syntax.
>
> > So please, someone put it in the main lua source so I don't have to 
> > keep
> > patching it.
>
> While I don't miss continue, I'm not opposed to adding it. I am, 
> however,
> _strongly_ opposed to complicating the language with break and continue
> levels. If you add those, you might just as well add 'goto' and we all
> know how people feel about it. (I actually use goto in C, but only to
> jump to an error handler at the end of a function. In languages like
> Lua 1) most of the time there is no need for such handlers and 2) when
> there is, there are many alternative implementations thanks to lexical
> scoping and first-class functions.)
>
> --
> Tuomo