1.5.2 for: else:

[bowman]

T. C. Mits wrote:
> 
> ALL:
>     I'm a newbie so I may be out of line here, but the for: else: construct
> is pretty bad.  It just does not read well, and implies the incorrect
> operation; 

	I would agree that this use of 'else' is counterintuitive, though is
isn't quite as bad as Perl's use of 'continue'. Java's keyword,
'finally', would be another option, but that carries the meaning of a
block that is always executed.

	In practice, it doesn't seem to be necessary, so it can be ignored by
old C coders who can't quite remember how it works.

-- 
Bear Technology  Making Montana safe for Grizzlies

http://people.montana.com/~bowman/