220 3601 article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Smith Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: "break break ;" etc. to break out of nested loops Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2013 12:32:05 -0700 Lines: 180 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <1f964e4b-2762-43b8-85e5-41392926b07a@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae93410f938d51b04d9b642dd X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1365276726 9191 80.91.229.3 (6 Apr 2013 19:32:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2013 19:32:06 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBDVNBJG4YAIBBNXQQGFQKGQEVRZMZ2I@isocpp.org Sat Apr 06 21:32:09 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-ie0-f200.google.com ([209.85.223.200]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UOYqO-0005ho-2p for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Apr 2013 21:32:08 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-ie0-f200.google.com with SMTP id c11sf26493361ieb.7 for ; Sat, 06 Apr 2013 12:32:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received:received-spf:mime-version :x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type; bh=yugchVN3uY/k29Zu1DRd3uHMFDezpTP0QgLDSzCcEmM=; b=rqNs1ezYdkEPKzhdNRPwgtvJArwpudC5xi06GibDEkhjBTDVwtgyaiKymZVpNeBLuP O9Bt36fNa02wvxq2QkldTrsK1pNdA++EKhzQkXk8CTZYrO4mMtCZZwjHpUIcCDaRXj3K URvYMim2V5sv6GBHY9Qlzoxcq3rOumh/67OQfLJgXPP3T5R8qZ6OR69OC0TIaMH0hht0 5TywRDz1cwOR5cx3cPs12HxCuKCfe6i+PY9sw3yIbUPBqMlGMziY9cFGFaCQmUIev4Mt fgXOnNKrEcZn0s1KV6LEy/98umwUOfg8wa0Hpzf/fUNBg/3OUhbsK X-Received: by 10.50.82.74 with SMTP id g10mr3637215igy.7.1365276727106; Sat, 06 Apr 2013 12:32:07 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.50.135.35 with SMTP id pp3ls1284969igb.1.canary; Sat, 06 Apr 2013 12:32:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.43.134.202 with SMTP id id10mr8225893icc.46.1365276725539; Sat, 06 Apr 2013 12:32:05 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from mail-ia0-x22a.google.com (mail-ia0-x22a.google.com [2607:f8b0:4001:c02::22a]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x14si8491426igg.53.2013.04.06.12.32.05 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 06 Apr 2013 12:32:05 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of metafoo@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4001:c02::22a as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:4001:c02::22a; Original-Received: by mail-ia0-f170.google.com with SMTP id h8so4169037iaa.29 for ; Sat, 06 Apr 2013 12:32:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.50.212.74 with SMTP id ni10mr2776501igc.60.1365276725136; Sat, 06 Apr 2013 12:32:05 -0700 (PDT) Original-Sender: metafoo@gmail.com Original-Received: by 10.64.168.99 with HTTP; Sat, 6 Apr 2013 12:32:05 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.64.168.99 with HTTP; Sat, 6 Apr 2013 12:32:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: richard@metafoo.co.uk X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of metafoo@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4001:c02::22a as permitted sender) smtp.mail=metafoo@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list std-proposals@isocpp.org; contact std-proposals+owners@isocpp.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:3601 Archived-At: --14dae93410f938d51b04d9b642dd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Apr 5, 2013 3:23 PM, "Tony V E" wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 3:23 PM, wrote: >> >> I suggest the following syntax: >> >> The break break statement jumps out of the second-nearest enclosing do, for, switch, or while statement. >> The break break break statement jumps out of the third-nearest enclosing do, for, switch, or while statement. >> The break break break break statement jumps out of the fourth-nearest enclosing do, for, switch, or while statement. >> > > break; > break(2); > break(3); > break(4); > > (and break(1) would also work). > > Not sure about runtime values > > int n = ... > break(n); > > And I'd rather have: > > break name; > > For a named loop construct somehow. Maybe > > label: for (;;) > { > break label; > } > > > And all that is not saying I agree with any of it, or really want it; just some suggestions. I think I would prefer for outer (...) { for (...) { if (...) break outer; } } Using a label to refer to its labeled statement feels like an abuse of the facility to me. > Tony > > -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. > To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en. > > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en. --14dae93410f938d51b04d9b642dd Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Apr 5, 2013 3:23 PM, "Tony V E" <tvaneerd@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 3:23 PM, <temptony@freemail.hu> wrote:
>>
>> I suggest the following syntax:
>>
>> The=A0break=A0break statement jumps out of the second-nearest encl= osing=A0do, for, switch,=A0or=A0while=A0statement.
>> The=A0break=A0break=A0break=A0statement jumps out of the third-nea= rest enclosing=A0do, for, switch,=A0or=A0while=A0statement.
>> The=A0break=A0break=A0break break=A0statement jumps out of the fou= rth-nearest enclosing=A0do, for, switch,=A0or=A0while=A0statement.
>>
>
> break;
> break(2);
> break(3);
> break(4);
> =A0
> (and break(1) would also work).
>
> Not sure about runtime values
>
> int n =3D ...
> break(n);
>
> And I'd rather have:
>
> break name;
>
> For a named loop construct somehow. Maybe
>
> label: for (;;)
> {
> =A0=A0 break label;
> }
>
>
> And all that is not saying I agree with any of it, or really want it; = just some suggestions.

I think I would prefer

for outer (...) {
=A0 for (...) {
=A0=A0=A0 if (...)
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 break outer;
=A0 }
}

Using a label to refer to its labeled statement feels like a= n abuse of the facility to me.

> Tony
>
> --
> =A0
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Gro= ups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send= an email to std-= proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
> To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/st= d-proposals/?hl=3Den.
> =A0
> =A0

--
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro= posals/?hl=3Den.
 
 
--14dae93410f938d51b04d9b642dd-- .