Re: [Flashforth-devel] For-next loop - full 16bit count?

[Mikael N. <mik...@fl...>]

I did some experiments with this and have now two for..next loops
: t for r@ u. next ;  ok<#,ram>
: tt for2 r@ u. next ;  ok<#,ram>
9 t 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0  ok<#,ram>
9 tt 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0  ok<#,ram>

The only problem is the naming of the words.
The old FOR ideally should be called ?FOR
and the new one FOR.
But that introduces a problem with existing FF code...

Mike

On 24.05.2015 16:00, om1zz wrote:
> Yea, I do understand the zero loop skip intention, but I consider that a bug.
> There is no way to do full 65536 loops with 16bit without doing 0 for..next.
>
> As the web knowledge says - there are only incompatible for-next loops and inefficient and lazy do-loops :)
>
> I would recommnd to change the behavior to full 16bit, entering 0 should be the users responsibility (similar as divide by zero).