ForNext "Autostep"

Post by **Fred** » Tue Jan 27, 2004 11:06 am

Step (expression) is definitely a must have. I will try to implement it for the next version. Forget the DowTo stuff, I should be drunk

blueznl · Post by **blueznl** » Tue Jan 27, 2004 11:06 am

most basics i know simply use step with vars, i'd say keep it simple

LarsG · Post by **LarsG** » Tue Jan 27, 2004 2:15 pm

Fred wrote:...I should be drunk

oh.. shouldn't we all!!!

Post by **Dare2** » Tue Jan 27, 2004 2:29 pm

LarsG wrote:
fred wrote:...I should be drunk
oh.. shouldn't we all!!!

Pass the bottle.

Psychophanta · Post by **Psychophanta** » Wed Jan 28, 2004 2:58 pm

Mmmmh, Fred; should be possible to improve a "for-next" loop just identical like is in C

Well, i don't say to replace the existing one, but to improve (add) a new for-next alternative. I thing this is perhaps the best point of C's power, besides of pointers, etc.

For <assignment[,assignment[,...]]>,<(expression)>,<instruction[,instruction[,...]]>
;code
Next

PB would continue being a BASIC.

plouf · Post by **plouf** » Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:08 pm

Psychophanta wrote:Mmmmh, Fred; should be possible to improve a "for-next" loop just identical like is in C

For <assignment[,assignment[,...]]>,<(expression)>,<instruction[,instruction[,...]]>
;code
Next

but this is not much sense (at least to me) i know a bit of c

this can be done extremly easy with while loop

<assignment[,assignment[,...]]>
while <(expression)>
...
<instruction[,instruction[,...]]>
wend

(in c the while is a useless command its fuctionality can be done with for)

blueznl · Post by **blueznl** » Wed Jan 28, 2004 5:54 pm

sorry, fred, synchronous posting

but ehm.. while useless in c++? readability...

Psychophanta · Post by **Psychophanta** » Wed Jan 28, 2004 7:01 pm

Plouf wrote:

(in c the while is a useless command its fuctionality can be done with for)

That's absolutely true.
And if PB include a For-Next loop as i suggested, then While-Wend should be useless in PB too

blueznl wrote:

but ehm.. while useless in c++? readability...

Readability? In C ? Are you joking? Isn't preferable ASM for readability ?

Post by **Dare2** » Wed Jan 28, 2004 11:43 pm

Readability? In C ? Are you joking? Isn't preferable ASM for readability ?

hehe.

Also the General Theory of Relativity.

Psychophanta · Post by **Psychophanta** » Thu Jan 29, 2004 11:45 am

Yeah! that astrophysic theory is cleverly posted here

All is inside astrophysics, including all of us...

Octopus · Post by **Octopus** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 11:21 am

Despite of the problem initially mentioned I nevertheless vote for having a FOR ... DOWNTO language element within PB. This is because there often are also additional tests inside a FOR ... NEXT loop against the final barrier. Thus it would help and probably speed up, if that could be done against a zero value, which often is the natural loop bottom boundary.