Re: upcoming changes in Lua 5.2
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index]
[
Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: upcoming changes in Lua 5.2
- From: "Alex Davies" <alex.mania@...>
- Date: 2008年2月26日 23:23:10 +0900
From: "Alexander Gladysh"
Continue contradicts with my understanding of single exit point idiom.
I don't think single exit point theorem has any place in a language that has
both a "return" statement and allows multiple returns. At least not to be
followed religiously, or it'd lead to some terribly inefficient code.
Remembering that no programmer will be forced to use continue, I don't
really see any negatives. Besides of course that it'll be hard to remove
from the language at a later date, should it prove incompatible with some
new syntax ;) (eg, the repeat until scope rule). Although it's rarely
needed, the few times where is it currently require a complete code
restructure, and possibly temporary state variables that would otherwise
uneeded. Plus most people take it for granted that the language will support
it. My vote goes for keep repeat untils, keep the repeat until scope, but
throw an error if your continue jumps in to access of locals declared
beneath it.
- Alex
- References:
- Location of a package, Ignacio Burgueño
- Re: Location of a package, Fabien
- Re: Location of a package, Roberto Ierusalimschy
- Re: Location of a package, eugeny gladkih
- upcoming changes in Lua 5.2 [was Re: Location of a package], Roberto Ierusalimschy
- Re: upcoming changes in Lua 5.2 [was Re: Location of a package], Shmuel Zeigerman
- Re: upcoming changes in Lua 5.2 [was Re: Location of a package], Roberto Ierusalimschy
- Re: upcoming changes in Lua 5.2 [was Re: Location of a package], Asko Kauppi
- Re: upcoming changes in Lua 5.2 [was Re: Location of a package], Doug Rogers
- Re: upcoming changes in Lua 5.2, Miles Bader
- Re: upcoming changes in Lua 5.2, Alexander Gladysh