Re: [boost] [Boost.Breakable] Any interest in a Boost Breakable library?

Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost.Breakable] Any interest in a Boost Breakable library?
From: Pierre Morcello (pmorcell-cppfrance_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-09-06 13:58:53

Hi, there is no difference.

Indeed, the macro as I use it right now is even less optimised than a GOTO or a do...while(false) : it's currently just a simple 'for' loop in a macro..

The aim is to make code more readable. A goto is a pain to manage when you use a lot this 'breakable' structure. The fact that it is easy to use and readable makes it easier to use a lot. In the end, I happen myself to use it lot more than I thougth I would at first. That is the main reason why I am proposing it here.

>>>Both are probably shorter to write.
Yes, although someone using such library may redefine the macro as he wishes :
e.g. #define Breakable BOOST_BREAKABLE
I am just conforming to BOOST coding style.

Pierre

--- En date de : Dim 6.9.09, Sebastian Redl <sebastian.redl_at_[hidden]> a écrit :

De: Sebastian Redl <sebastian.redl_at_[hidden]>
Objet: Re: [boost] [Boost.Breakable] Any interest in a Boost Breakable library?
À: boost_at_[hidden]
Date: Dimanche 6 Septembre 2009, 9h10

Pierre Morcello wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I propose a set of macros that allow to break anywhere. Example of use of the main macro :
>
> // do something...
> BOOST_BREAKABLE
> {
>     if (test1)
>     {
>           break;
>     }
>     if (test2)
>
>     {
>
>           break;
>
>     }
>
>
>     std::cout<<"this is never reached if test1==true or test2==true. "<<std::endl;
>     // do something...
> }
> // here the program continues ...
>
> Is there any interest in such a library?
>   
What's the difference between this and a goto? Or a do ... while(false);
loop? Both are probably shorter to write.

Sebastian
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost