Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
No such thing as a small change

Re: Re: do/redo or for(;;): what's Kosher?

by merlyn (Sage)
on Jan 03, 2002 at 22:46 UTC ( #136038=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re: do/redo or for(;;): what's Kosher?
in thread do/redo or for(;;): what's Kosher?

That would be fine, except last/next/redo don't respect that as a "loop" because that's not a real loop-block. That's why I came up with the other version: it's a lean, mean, looping machine!

-- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker

  • Comment on Re: Re: do/redo or for(;;): what's Kosher?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re(3): do/redo or for(;;): what's Kosher?
by dmmiller2k (Chaplain) on Jan 04, 2002 at 21:27 UTC

    Just curious. Why would you prefer this:

    { # do stuff last if BREAK-CONDITION; redo; }

    to this:

    { # do stuff redo if !BREAK-CONDITION; }

    or even (just to be pedantic),

    { # do stuff redo unless BREAK-CONDITION; }


      I'm pretty sure that the reason is:

      { # do loop stuff to be done at least once last if BREAK-CONDITION; # do middle loop stuff <<< This part was left out redo; }
      which I'd still use while(1) for. Plus it allows you to do:
      { # read next line last if NoMoreLines # extract item from line redo if NoItemInLine last if EndOfItemListFound # categorize item redo if WrongItemCategory # check for updates redo if NoUpdatesThisCategory; # check permissions last if NoUpdatesAllowed; redo if ThisUpdateNotAllowed; # do update redo if NotFatal; # handle fatal error # (note, no "redo" here so this part isn't really # part of the "loop", just stuff to do once unless # "last" gets triggered above.) } # done with items
      where it is very easy to throw in a new check or new code in. But, as I said elsewhere, I find that power to be too easy to abuse. YMMV.

              - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")

        Ah, in that context, I see where this approach could be useful.

        I think I agree with you, though, that the while (1) (with scattered nexts in place of redos) accomplishes the same thing in a more self-explanatory way.


        You can give a man a fish and feed him for a day ...
        Or, you can
        teach him to fish and feed him for a lifetime

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://136038]
and all is quiet...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others romping around the Monastery: (6)
As of 2018-05-26 15:03 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?