> David L. Nicol wrote:
> > "Randal L. Schwartz" wrote:
> > >
> > > I think we need a distinction between "looping" blocks and
> > > "non-looping" blocks. And further, it still makes sense to
> > > distinguish "blocks that return values" (like subroutines and map/grep
> > > blocks) from either of those. But I'll need further time to process
> > > your proposal to see the counterarguments now.
> >
> > In the odd parallel universe where most perl 6 flow control is handled
> > by the throwing and catching of exceptions, the next/last/redo controls
> > are macros for throwing next/last/redo exceptions. Loop control
> > structures catch these objects and throw them again
> > if they are labeled and the label does not match a label the loop control
> > structure recognizes as its own.
I find this urge to push exceptions everywhere quite sad.
> Most folks seem to think that a grep block is more like a loop
> block, and so want to use C<last>; I have been more of the
> opinion that a grep block is more like a sub, and so should use
> C<return>. In the other camp, C<yield> has been suggested; but
> the conflation of that with its thread-related semantics may not
> be a such good idea.
C<pass>.
--
$jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/
# There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'.
# It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen
