| |
GOTO was very easy to program. :o)
A little more seriously now: I think it belongs to the BASIC-like syntax I have chosen. Especially in IF statements.
Anyway, noone is forced to [ab]use it.
I don't think WHILE-WEND will be too hard to code, and it will pobably be added soon. I've never liked the DO syntax, it
makes me uncertain of what the code means. (But that's my opinion.) If I add WHILE-WEND to the already existing
FOR-TO-STEP-NEXT loop possibilities, I think most situations in part creation will be covered up. Or...?
Thanks for your comments,
/Tore
Farlie A wrote:
> In lugnet.cad, Tore Eriksson writes:
> > http://home2.swipnet.se/~w-20413/lds/lds.htm
> > Added in 0.28:
> > * IF-THEN-ELSE-END IF
> Good!!
>
> > * GOTO
>
> Reasoning for GOTO?
> GOTO is a construct which can very easily be abused.
> better to have "proper" strcutures likw while-DO, repeat-until etc.
>
> Alex
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: LDS ver 0.28
|
| (...) Double-:) (...) Right! Any chance of getting GOSUB and RETURN? (...) Hmm. It's your program, and you should definitely use it the way your want. But I've always preferred DO ... LOOP over WHILE ... WEND. It's partly because DO ... LOOP can be (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LDS ver 0.28
|
| (...) Good!! (...) Reasoning for GOTO? GOTO is a construct which can very easily be abused. better to have "proper" strcutures likw while-DO, repeat-until etc. Alex (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
9 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
