|Subject:||Re: Why should `break' and `continue' in functions not break loops running outside of the function?|
|Date:||Sat, 30 Oct 2021 11:55:31 -0400|
|User-agent:||Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.2.1|
On 10/30/21 11:02 AM, Oğuz wrote:
On Sat, Oct 30, 2021 at 4:50 PM Greg Wooledge <email@example.com> wrote:As Chet said, it's counterintuitive. Most people don't expect function A to be able to affect loops inside function B.I do, and a subshell can prevent function A from affecting loops inside function B. But that is not a real problem, you wouldn't call, say `break 3', when you're only 2 loop levels deep in a function unless you wanted to exit from the loop from within the function is called after returning.It's a violation of scope.It's a violation of lexical scope, I'm asking why not implement dynamic scope, what's wrong with it?
You might be interested in https://www.austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=842 There was a discussion on the austin-group mailing list back in 2016 accompanying this defect report. Chet -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU firstname.lastname@example.org http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|