why no "do : until"?

[Steve Lamb]

On Wed, 03 Jan 2001 11:24:34 -0700, Bjorn Pettersen <pbjorn at uswest.net> wrote:
>So then you'd also write:

>do {
>    something;
>}
>while (condition);

>to be consistent?  Seems ugly and inconsistent to me (the else isn't a
>statement, it's part of the if ;-)

    I don't write in a language that has a do/while (incidentally I feel that
all loops outside of while are superfulous, but that's just me).  Secondly it
isn't statements that are intended, it is blocks.  The else denotes the
beginning of a different block.  Yes, it is part of the if, but it is the
beginning of the next block.  I don't take { on a line of its own and }
doesn't close another }.

    In that case Python is actually quite clear.

if something:
  do something
else
  do something else

    Note that the else is on the same intention as the if because it is
starting a different block?  Same as:

if (something) {
  do something;
}
else {
  do something else;
}

    The difference there is that one needs the } to close the block.  I do not
feel that pushing the else over, effectively intenting it, makes the code
clear.

if (something) {
  do something;
} else {
  do something else;
}

    ... translated to "no braces"...

if (something) {
  do something;
  else
  do something else;

    Doesn't quite match the Python way of denoting the beginning of the next
block with the else:, does it?

    So, to recap.  } ends a block, if/else/elsif (perl), etc starts a block,
the closing } lines up with the opening statement, not the opening brace.

    Any wonder why I want to switch over to Python for a great many things?

-- 
         Steve C. Lamb         | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
         ICQ: 5107343          | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------