The 'do' in this could be a 'for' if for allowed an optional 'while' after
the close brace.
On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 9:08 PM Louki Sumirniy <
louki.sumirniy.stal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have a preferred methtod for emulating do-while:
>
> notdone:=true
> for notdone {
> <do something>
> if <condition> {
> notdone = false
> }
> }
>
> I prefer to use a negative name because I don't see why I should use a
> unary operator when I can just use the word NOT and not incur any runtime
> cost.
>
> or
>
> for !<terminal condition that will evaluate true before> {
> <do thing that might change terminal condition>
> }
>
> The for is so awesome that the only that is theoretically missing is a
> do-while.
>
> Also, another way to do this would be using labels. If you put a label
> before the part beginning what you want to repeat, you can put a condition
> at the end that jumps to the label for your repeat condition. I think the
> label could even be Do:
>
> But it would be pretty cool if a do-while was added, since it won't break
> old code, but it will break using old versions prior to this addition. It
> would look like this
>
> do {
>
> } while <condition>
>
> I suppose. Someone posted about a macro processor that probably could do
> something like this. I personally don't see the point because most of the
> time I can find a way to use the second construct I showed earlier - a
> condition that does not evaluate false until the inner block has executed
> at least once.
>
> On Tuesday, 1 May 2018 14:11:04 UTC+3, Hugh Fisher wrote:
>>
>>
>> Another observation from this novice Go programmer: I'm puzzled why
>> there's no while statement.
>>
>> I know it's possible to use a for, but it doesn't feel right to me. I
>> always
>> think of for loops as for iterating over data structures. Originally just
>> arrays, but languages like Python and Objective-C have extended for
>> loops to other collections as well. "Looping until some condition is met"
>> for me is a different control structure and needs a different keyword.
>>
>> There'd be overlap with the for statement, but if-then-else and switch
>> with boolean case overlap too.
>>
>> And since while has been a reserved keyword in a lot of programming
>> languages for many decades, I would bet a reasonable amount of
>> money that a while statement could be added to Go right now and not
>> break anyone's production code.
>>
>> cheers,
>> Hugh Fisher
>>
>> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "golang-nuts" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
--
Michael T. Jones
michael.jo...@gmail.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
