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

[om1zz <om...@vo...>]

Hmm, the old FOR shall behave, I think:

2 for ---> 1 0 (2 counts)
0 for ----> 65535 65534 .. 0 (65536 counts)

new ?FOR

2 ?for ---> 1 0 (2 counts)
0 ?for ---> skip (none count)

So no change with 99,99999% of old code.
I.

______________________________________________________________
> Od: Mikael Nordman <mik...@fl...>
> Komu: <fla...@li...>
> Datum: 26.05.2015 06:38
> Předmět: Re: [Flashforth-devel] For-next loop - full 16bit count?
>
>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).
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud 
>Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
>Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
>Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
>http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
>_______________________________________________
>Flashforth-devel mailing list
>Fla...@li...
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flashforth-devel
>