Re: for_UP_and_DOWN

[David Kastrup]

Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:

> On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 04:41:40PM +0200, Łukasz Czerwiński wrote:
>> On 14 April 2012 16:25, Graham Percival <address@hidden> wrote:
>> 
>> > tldr summary: we use these for direction loops:
>
> oops, that should be "we propose that we use these direction
> loops"
>
>> > for (UP_and_DOWN(d))
>> >   { ... }
>> > for (LEFT_and_RIGHT(d))
>> >   { ... }
>> 
>> Ok, I'll do so.
>
> Not yet.  I just wanted to clarify what you were talking about,
> since most people don't have the time to go trawling through
> rietveld discussions.  If something is difficult to understand,
> the first instinct is just to ignore the discussion.

Is this supposed to declare d itself or not?

-- 
David Kastrup