Crowd Funding Enhancements

[J. Landman Gay]

On 3/15/14, 12:16 PM, Scott Rossi wrote:
> We have all been doing what you suggest for years, which is precisely the
> point.  There are several reasons why having "repeat for each <control>Š"
> would be extremely welcome.
>
> 1) Precedents for this structure already exist in the language, so it's
> not a departure:
> repeat for each item x in "a,b,c".
>
> 2) The "repeat for each" structure is more efficient than looping through
> controls, and developers would gain the benefits of fast processing.
>
> 3) The lives of developers would be easier.
>
> How many times have I started typing "repeat for each buttonŠ" and then
> stopped myself, having remembered "Oh yeah, we can't do that."

Exactly. It seems so natural that even though I've been using xtalk 
since 1987, I still inadvertently try to use that structure 
occasionally. I suspect new users will too. But as Richmond says, it's a 
trivial feature request, and there's a ready workaround, so I've never 
asked for it in the bug database. But I keep thinking someday I should.

Maybe one of our C++ geniuses will take pity on us.

-- 
Jacqueline Landman Gay         |     jacque at hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software           |     http://www.hyperactivesw.com