FOR NEXT behavior

On Sep 9, 11:24 am, "Tom Lake" <tl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "Judson McClendon" <ju...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> news:Z8VEi.53219$t9.52839@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > <n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > One thing that surprised me is the behavior of FOR/NEXT, in always
making
> > one iteration, regardless of the initial loop variables. I don't
recall
> > ever using
> > a BASIC, or any other language sup****ting FOR, with that behavior.
>
> You missed some of the most popular microcomputer BASICs of the
> '70's and '80s!
>
> Altair BASIC, Applesoft BASIC, Commodore BASIC, TRS-80 Level II and
> Model III BASIC (All written by Gates and Co.) all performed one
iteration
> even when the end value was less than the start value and no step was
> specified.

I'm surprised that you didn't mention that the Basic
Standard says that a FOR NEXT loop should be skipped
if the initial value fails the end loop comparison.
I think that was the way it was originally implemented
in Dartmouth Basic.

So that's the way Chipmunk Basic attempts to behave,
skip the loop if the FOR and NEXT statements are in
the proper order.

I've once wondered whether I should put in a switch
to optionally do one iteration in order to be more
compatible with various "street" Basic programs.


IMHO. YMMV.
--
rhn A.T nicholson d.0.t C-o-M
  Chipmunk Basic: http://www.nicholson.com/rhn/basic