>   Break and continue statements can be followed
>   by label. The label is the label for an enclosing
>   loop or switch, and the break applies to that
>   loop.
>
>         Louter:
>           for (i = 0; i < 10; i++)
>           {
>               for (j = 0; j < 10; j++)
>               {
>                   if (j == 3)
>                       break Louter;
>                   if (j == 4)
>                       continue Louter;
>               }
>           }
>           // break Louter goes here


Why not use the loop counter and just say:
   break i;
   continue i;

Regards


john

"hrdo" <hrdo@myrealbox.com> wrote in message news:9lh86e$2sne$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> >   Break and continue statements can be followed
> >   by label. The label is the label for an enclosing
> >   loop or switch, and the break applies to that
> >   loop.
> >
> >         Louter:
> >           for (i = 0; i &lt; 10; i++)
> >           {
> >               for (j = 0; j &lt; 10; j++)
> >               {
> >                   if (j == 3)
> >                       break Louter;
> >                   if (j == 4)
> >                       continue Louter;
> >               }
> >           }
> >           // break Louter goes here
>
>
> Why not use the loop counter and just say:
>    break i;
>    continue i;

Because the loop counter could be any expression, or even no expression at all. -Walter

The coder can still just use a 'break' with no label to break out of the currently executing loop right?

"hrdo" <hrdo@myrealbox.com> wrote in message news:9lh86e$2sne$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> >   Break and continue statements can be followed
> >   by label. The label is the label for an enclosing
> >   loop or switch, and the break applies to that
> >   loop.
> >
> >         Louter:
> >           for (i = 0; i &lt; 10; i++)
> >           {
> >               for (j = 0; j &lt; 10; j++)
> >               {
> >                   if (j == 3)
> >                       break Louter;
> >                   if (j == 4)
> >                       continue Louter;
> >               }
> >           }
> >           // break Louter goes here
>
>
> Why not use the loop counter and just say:
>    break i;
>    continue i;
>
> Regards
>
>
> john
>
>

Michael Gaskins wrote in message <9li9d7$o5u$1@digitaldaemon.com>...
>The coder can still just use a 'break' with no label to break out of the currently executing loop right?


Yes.

You know, I've sometimes wished for the ability to break out of a if or else statement-- perhaps any block.  Unfortunately that would make conditionally breaking out of a loop difficult.  It usually indicates a need for a goto, which I am glad to have in the language BTW.

Sean


"Walter" <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:9liija$11h1$2@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> Michael Gaskins wrote in message <9li9d7$o5u$1@digitaldaemon.com>...
> >The coder can still just use a 'break' with no label to break out of the currently executing loop right?
>
>
> Yes.

Having a goto can be pretty handy now and then.

"Sean L. Palmer" <spalmer@iname.com> wrote in message news:9s34o4$2imj$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> You know, I've sometimes wished for the ability to break out of a if or
else
> statement-- perhaps any block.  Unfortunately that would make
conditionally
> breaking out of a loop difficult.  It usually indicates a need for a goto, which I am glad to have in the language BTW.
>
> Sean
>
>
> "Walter" <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:9liija$11h1$2@digitaldaemon.com...
> >
> > Michael Gaskins wrote in message <9li9d7$o5u$1@digitaldaemon.com>...
> > >The coder can still just use a 'break' with no label to break out of
the
> > >currently executing loop right?
> >
> >
> > Yes.
>
>
>

Walter wrote:

> Having a goto can be pretty handy now and then.

I've had to do some "portable" bare-metal C programming, which basically means I got as close to assembler as I could using C, and then checked the assembler output for a variety of targets.  Having a goto available saved my butt more than once, especially when DSP, CISC, RISC (and once even an SIMD vector supercomputer) compilers output very different code for specific conditional tests and looping constructs.

Careful use of goto will even allow some fairly elegant OOPification of such low-level code, making it all the more maintainable.  Just in case I ever need to "escape" from D's object model, I'd like to have a goto available to help craft a tiny workable substitute.

It was always a pain to create such code, but the result was extremely efficient and portable, all without using assembler or platform-specific defines.  Ya just gotta love C.  And the goto statement.

Of course, sometimes I naturally had to forbid compiler upgrades for all targets...  At least for key modules.   ;^)

And what would such code be used for, you ask?  Well, the first time I crafted such code was about 15 years ago, for a rather complex integrated audio and video processing library.  Our favorite demo for the library would turn a Cray into a real-time polyphonic guitar processor (complete with a full set of simulated stomp boxes) and light show (driving multiple displays in sync with whatever was being played on the guitar).  The real uses of the package were classified, and I have no idea what they were (though real-time sonar analysis and display does seem a distinct possibility).

The best part of building that demo was figuring out how to hook a Fender Stratacaster up to a Cray...


-BobC

"Robert W. Cunningham" <rwc_2001@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3BFB22BD.BC665081@yahoo.com...
> Careful use of goto will even allow some fairly elegant OOPification of
such
> low-level code, making it all the more maintainable.  Just in case I ever
need
> to "escape" from D's object model, I'd like to have a goto available to
help
> craft a tiny workable substitute.

I've never liked the Pascal religion which required the creation of numerous dummy flag variables whose only purpose was to emulate a goto.

"Walter" <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:9tfn7j$1ql1$2@digitaldaemon.com...

> I've never liked the Pascal religion which required the creation of
numerous
> dummy flag variables whose only purpose was to emulate a goto.

All implementations of Pascal I ever used (BP, Delphi, FreePascal, Virtual
Pascal) support goto.