220 3603 <1365208009.32597.12.camel@patrick-laptop-debian.home> article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Patrick Michael Niedzielski Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Re: "break break ;" etc. to break out of nested loops Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2013 00:26:49 +0000 Lines: 31 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: <1365208009.32597.12.camel@patrick-laptop-debian.home> References: <1f964e4b-2762-43b8-85e5-41392926b07a@isocpp.org> <85c0ae97-3440-4a81-96c2-1af7ebb892ba@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1365278015 22952 80.91.229.3 (6 Apr 2013 19:53:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2013 19:53:35 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBC4IXLVISQMRBWOX7WFAKGQEMMDCUBA@isocpp.org Sat Apr 06 21:53:38 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-qc0-f198.google.com ([209.85.216.198]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UOZBA-0008OH-VN for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Apr 2013 21:53:37 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-qc0-f198.google.com with SMTP id v20sf6210867qcm.9 for ; Sat, 06 Apr 2013 12:53:36 -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:x-received :message-id:subject:from:to:date:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version: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=VOPICCYbCndD0Op2sLkSGLUmpzXegkC4pTD4kgXwswE=; b=of1ljAY5vhrjVVCcWsvFDXu1IGiRJFqXSY8+M5Gden4MjbZk1sqlxT1FI1YKor8QCz QCvXnrf6qG0RcLbfYtYaE9kOo6AVvV8mJIeXd/l/bc9wnWaBk94iOAtyYB7yaU36ZOL5 F2/nZcwzsrzm8eM6Er821nOLDmL2gxiqSssH6P3vlyEgJ+KZx7BJ30QqJ0OK9lhDZ+cE R2OQJhMZfMXxIz4P3WUmFAgOc+2NaG8G5v7blkoXAmbKxiaziraLoChSmhzFu71AuRtn 6Jk/3LU8q+V5Fq/zsdSNeWMoVP1DdyWg630g3fWgy0/DKpBdICK X-Received: by 10.224.18.132 with SMTP id w4mr226456qaa.1.1365208025970; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 17:27:05 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.49.118.70 with SMTP id kk6ls43013qeb.9.gmail; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 17:27:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.52.178.161 with SMTP id cz1mr8241699vdc.7.1365208024432; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 17:27:04 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from mail-vb0-x22c.google.com (mail-vb0-x22c.google.com [2607:f8b0:400c:c02::22c]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l8si12430787vdw.150.2013.04.05.17.27.04 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 05 Apr 2013 17:27:04 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of patrickniedzielski@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c02::22c as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400c:c02::22c; Original-Received: by mail-vb0-f44.google.com with SMTP id e12so2553144vbg.17 for ; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 17:27:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.220.91.17 with SMTP id k17mr4444663vcm.36.1365208024287; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 17:27:04 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.8] (pool-108-49-23-65.bstnma.fios.verizon.net. [108.49.23.65]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id qq6sm15853445vec.2.2013.04.05.17.27.02 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 05 Apr 2013 17:27:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <85c0ae97-3440-4a81-96c2-1af7ebb892ba@isocpp.org> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4-3 X-Original-Sender: patrickniedzielski@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of patrickniedzielski@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c02::22c as permitted sender) smtp.mail=patrickniedzielski@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:3603 Archived-At: On ven, 2013-04-05 at 12:53 -0700, Andrew Sandoval wrote: > How about *return*? That way you are pushed towards keeping your functions > simple. [slightly off-topic, but keeping the same thread for now] For large and complex loops, this is good advice. For small and short nested loops (looping a single statement over a two dimensional array), breaking the code off into a separate function can (*can*, not *will*) make the code harder to understand. It should be determined on a case-by-case basis whether breaking the code into a separate function is actually productive or makes the flow and reasoning behind the code less clear. This is actually an okay place for a goto, if the loops are short and clear, and breaking the two loops into a separate function doesn't make sense. Just be sure to document the reason for its use in the code. Cheers, Patrick Niedzielski -- --- 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. .