Hi,

Sorry, I'm not taking the time to think all of this through and reread the
entire discussion, but anyway,
whats wrong with

break [optional-label]
and possibly

continue [optional-label]

as I understand java has??

david jencks

On 2001.06.07 11:40:28 -0400 Ann W. Harrison wrote:
> We can create label/leave, and break, and continue without
> changing the blr languages will be entirely in DSQL which
> will need to learn to parse and compile the new constructs
> and generate labels for breaks and continues. No incompatibility
> with IB - at the backup/restore and database access level.
> An extracted script will upset their DSQL... life is hard
> in the fast lane.
>
> My husband, the genius language designer and diplomat said:
>
> > The essence of bad language design is two constructs where one
> > is needed. Java, as a design goal, inherited C syntax to the
> > degree appropriate and hence the unlabelled break. The Firebird
> > language is undo no such constraint.
>
> I'm going to argue that although label/leave is a superset of
> break & continue, both those constructs are generally understood,
> convenient, and more maintainable than label/leave. So I'm
> going to argue for three constructs where one is needed. Even
> Datatrieve - that monument to language design - had three looping
> constructs where one was needed.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ann
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> IB-Architect-unsubscribe@onelist.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>