The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance". This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary". The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional". The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics". See also the WHILE LOOP and BREAK statement. If at any point it fails youll catch the exception, store some error in array or a property, then continue which. You use the CONTINUE statement to restart a WHILE LOOP and execute the WHILE LOOP body again from the start. This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. Basically you try to do whatever youre doing. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously. Meanwhile the continue keyword skips the current iteration of the loop. Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. In programming the difference between break and continue is that the break keyword is used to terminate the loop. Lars h: There is such an RFE logged for Tcl at. If you want to leave both an inner and outer loop, you would use break break. So, if you are in inner loop and you want to leave that one loop, you use break. I've had cases where I'd like to have had the feature, and I'm too lazy to write a tip for it, so i can't really complain that someone else hasn't either.Įscargo : In icon, break and next (the equivalent of continue) both have optional expressions that are evaluated in the context outside the current loop. I've never seen anyone with enough motivation to even write up a tip for it either, though. I've never seen a counter-argument as to why it would be a bad idea. Rhs: The idea of enhancing break and continue to accept an optional depth argument has been brought up multiple times in the past. Lv: Given that there's already the weird return arguments, what is the argument against enhancing continue as described above? Is there a technical issue with the proposal? some sort of "loop depth argument" would help me make it shorter. i asked the question in the first place because I already have a solution, but it forces me to add more code to an already very long proc that i am trying to do some liposuction on. I was indeed thinking of php's continue/break argument, as mg mentioned. Les: These suggestions all involve creating yet another procedure for my code, which is not really what I was looking for. Lars h: That won't work because it wouldn't become a continue until it returns from some routine. Schlenk: Did you try return -code continue -level. How hard would it be to add something like that into Tcl? Since neither break nor continue accept any arguments right now, as long as it defaulted to 1 it would have total backwards-compatability, and would, imho, be more "natural" than the above. Mg : In php, continue (and break) accept an argument that tells it how many nesting levels to continue/break for, slightly-similar to return -code. Breakeval continue # break out of j loop, do a continue for the i loop.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |