On Mon, 2002-04-29 at 10:41, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote: > On Mon, Apr 29, 2002 at 10:26:26AM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote: > > I would expect that to be "elsuntil", but as we're dropping "until" from > > the language, it's a moot point. > > Er, what?!? Who said we're dropping "until"? Did I miss something?
Well, if there's no while (replaced by generic "loop", per Apoc4) why would there be an until? > > Proposed Perl6: > > > > loop $i=0;$i<$max;$i++ { > > ... > > } elsfor @x -> $_ { > > ... > > } > > Hrm. Do you also propose an "elsloop" too? I think a general "else" > or "otherwise" on all loops allows what you want: Ok, once more for those in the cheap seats (no offense, it's just a lot of people seemed to have ignored the thread until now and jumped in without the context), this is how we got here: 1. Larry says loops will have "ELSE blocks" inside them. 2. Someone suggests "loop {} else {}" 3. Someone else points out that that's bad, because people will expect elsif 4. I point out that elsif isn't so bad, and perhaps there should be an array of other "else" options. So, the answer to your question is: yes, I do propose that there should be an elsif, elsloop and elsfor. That's it. Three words, not an expansive list of ever-more-complex words. Now, I agree that "else for" might make more sense, but it's very ugly on the grammar (given that we don't allow free statements like C does).