From: "meinrad.recheis" <my.name.here@...>
Date: 2003-08-08T06:06:59+09:00
Subject: Re: Elegant solution for a loop-break problem

Ok, i see. you could end up rescueing exceptions that should not be cought, 
for they were not raised to escape the loops.
sorry, mr

On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 04:29:48 +0900, Hal E. Fulton <hal9000@hypermetrics.com> 
wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "meinrad.recheis" <my.name.here@gmx.at>
> Newsgroups: comp.lang.ruby
> To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org>
> Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 1:46 PM
> Subject: Re: Elegant solution for a loop-break problem
>
>
>> why not? (i dont understand your indignation) because something is
> intended
>> for something special, it does not mean that it isnt good for something
>> else.
>> however, in java it is the only way to escape a nested loop.
>
> I don't think he's indignant. Nor am I. But I think
> exceptions are not the best way to do this in Ruby.
>
> I think in Ruby you should use throw/catch instead
> of raising an exception... I perceive these to be
> for exactly such boundary situations.
>
> Hal
>
>> -mr
>>
>> On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 16:54:48 +0200, Robert Klemme <bob.news@gmx.net> 
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > "meinrad.recheis" <my.name.here@gmx.at> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>> > news:oprtjhkqv9edtuaz@news.tuwien.ac.at...
>> >> raising an Exception is an excellent way of escaping nested loops.
>> >
>> > Err, are you serious?  IMHO exceptions are for exceptional conditions
> and
>> > not for control flow.
>> >
>> > robert
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>



-- 
- mr