On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 3:47 PM, <wkitt...@windstream.net> wrote: > by checking the value that caused the break ;) deity knows i've done it > many times before back in the TP/BP 6&7 days... i did it exactly as > described, too... we had to do it that way as there is/was no other way to > do it ;)
That's exactly the thing. You didn't have a cross-loop break, that's why you've to have some guaranteed values that would allow you to verify if a loop was broken or not. If it was broken then you'd set any additional conditions (if needed) to break out another loop and pass it above. In the end you end-up having additional break condition checks in each loop. Just by the fact, that a language doesn't provide you with any other means to do it less complex. I'd also need to note, that no other language, to my knowledge, have cross-loop breaks anyway :) Good-old language (Pascal / C /C++) still have goto though... but we won't use it, right? thanks, Dmitry
_______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
