RetroSearch Browse

Tue May 10 07:14:24 CEST 2005 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-May/053592.html

[Jim Jewett]
> > In case it isn't clear, I think named loops would be a mistake.  I
> > wanted them when I first started, but ... at the moment, I can't
> > think of any usage that wasn't an ugly speed hack, which is at
> > least more explicit with the "raise Found" idiom.

[Greg Ewing]
> I'm inclined to agree. Anything more elaborate than
> breaking from a single place in the immediately
> enclosing loop tends to be getting into the realm
> of spaghetti, in my experience. Giving people named
> loops would be tantamount almost to giving them
> a goto.

Yes please. Stop all discussion of breaking out of multiple loops. It
ain't gonna happen before my retirement.

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-May/053592.html below:

Deterministic Finalisation (new PEP draft, either a competitor or update to PEP 340)