Concrete Proposal: while ... and while ...

[Corran Webster]

In article <y0j3e0sn301.fsf at vier.idi.ntnu.no>,
Magnus L. Hetland <mlh at idt.ntnu.no> wrote:
>cwebster at math.tamu.edu (Corran Webster) writes:
>>
>
>Maybe -- but then the keyword "while" seems a bit strange...
>
>while:
>    line = readline()
>and while line:
>    print line
>
>To me, the "while: line=readline()" sounds like some kind of
>condition, and it certainly isn't... I would find this more
>understandable:
>
>repeat:
>    line = readline()
>and while line:
>    print line
>
>But then we have another keyword again...

I'm in agreement with you here, althought I'd prefer

do:
    line = readline()
while test:
    print line

although perhaps the "and" does fit in there better.  The suggestion of
"given test:" or something along those lines also has some resonance.

But let's face it, the exact spelling isn't a huge problem as long as
it does what you want unambiguously.  Many programmers seem to cope with
"for (i = 0; i < n; i++)" without their brains exploding. :)

>> It seems to me that with this change, 'while 1:' will be used much
>> less often, and it's not worth the additional complexity to make
>> the '1' optional.
>
>I agree... I think I meant it should be obligatory, since I find
>"while:" even more meaningless <wink>. Oh, well...

OK - I misunderstood what you were saying.  My apologies.

I can cope with "while:" but agree it seems more natural with a test
of some sort there.

It seems that this is an area where compromises will have to be made
one way or the other.

Corran