On Mon, 2002-08-12 at 12:09, Albert White - SUN Ireland wrote:
> If you want to stop in the middle of that because some condition is set then
> you probably should have used a while loop instead of `for`:
> 	# found our special case set flag to jump out of loop
> If you're using a break or similar construct in a while loop then you might
Good point, I didn't think of that. However, that doesn't help with a
case statement, which IMHO is cleaner than using an if statement if you
have a lot of branches... but then again maybe that should be refactored

from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E753D44122
	for <jm@localhost>; Tue, 13 Aug 2002 05:21:34 -0400 (EDT)
from phobos [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Tue, 13 Aug 2002 10:21:34 +0100 (IST)
from lugh.tuatha.org (root@lugh.tuatha.org [194.125.145.45]) by
    dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7CIvxb30038 for
    <jm-ilug@jmason.org>; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 19:57:59 +0100
from lugh (root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lugh.tuatha.org
    (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA01285; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 19:57:16 +0100
from cerberus.bluetree.ie (cerberus.bluetree.ie [62.17.24.129])
    by lugh.tuatha.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA01250 for
    <ilug@linux.ie>; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 19:57:04 +0100
(from mail@localhost) by cerberus.bluetree.ie (8.11.6/8.11.6) id
    g7CIuUW03746; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 19:56:30 +0100
Checked on cerberus.bluetree.ie at Mon Aug 12 19:56:24
    IST 2002
from atlas.bluetree.ie (IDENT:root@atlas.bluetree.ie
    [192.168.3.2]) by cerberus.bluetree.ie (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id
    g7CIuO803666; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 19:56:24 +0100
from arafel (arafel.bluetree.ie [192.168.3.42]) by
    atlas.bluetree.ie (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g7CIuNd26448;
    Mon, 12 Aug 2002 19:56:24 +0100
From ilug-admin@linux.ie  Tue Aug 13 10:28:16 2002

> > If you're using a break or similar construct in a while loop
> > want to rethink your guard condition.
> Good point, I didn't think of that. However, that doesn't help with a
> case statement, which IMHO is cleaner than using an if statement if you
> have a lot of branches... but then again maybe that should be refactored
Well, you should consider 'break' inside a 'select' statement
to be part of the syntax, rather than a control flow modifier.
A _mandatory_ part of the syntax, at that.