Sujet : Re: do { quit; } else { }
De : janis_papanagnou+ng (at) *nospam* hotmail.com (Janis Papanagnou)
Groupes : comp.lang.cDate : 14. Apr 2025, 05:23:43
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vti2ki$g23v$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
On 13.04.2025 18:39, bart wrote:
[...]
for(let i = 1; i <= 36; i++) {
Is it that hard to provide a proper for-loop where you don't have to
spell out every single detail?
You mean like in Algol 68 or maybe Simula? (Both are interesting.)
Fortran managed it in the 1950s!
I obviously don't recall FORTRAN good enough to have memorized any
"good" feature. But as (mostly?) an anachronism it anyway doesn't
matter any more (to me).
WRT FORTRAN _loops_ I (faintly) only recall a syntax ambiguity "by
design" (and jump labels); certainly not something to advocate.
Janis