Block Lambdas: break and continue

[Axel Rauschmayer]

The main problem I would have with "for" as a prefix is semantic, not grammatical: I would always expect to loop over something iterable and not a loop implementation.

My impression: Let’s wait until we have a more powerful collection library (which I assume would use block lambdas extensively). Then it should become clear where/if people miss break and continue. A label is a reasonable work-around that should even survive the insertion of a “loop-ifying” keyword.

Could we call block lambdas just lambdas? The former seems a bit pleonastic.

-- 
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
axel at rauschma.de

home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20120116/4b1b9b4d/attachment.html>