![]() |
Next without For - Printable Version +- QB64 Phoenix Edition (https://qb64phoenix.com/forum) +-- Forum: QB64 Rising (https://qb64phoenix.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Code and Stuff (https://qb64phoenix.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3) +---- Forum: Help Me! (https://qb64phoenix.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=10) +---- Thread: Next without For (/showthread.php?tid=3659) Pages:
1
2
|
Next without For - eoredson - 05-02-2025 Is this a bug or a feature? It keeps displaying 0 continuously.. Should it say 'Next without for'?? Code: (Select All) 10 GoTo 30 RE: Next without For - CharlieJV - 05-02-2025 (05-02-2025, 02:19 AM)eoredson Wrote: Is this a bug or a feature?With the interpreted GW-BASIC, it gives that "Next without for" error, which makes sense. Being interpreted, going from line 10 to line 30, the program has no idea there is a For loop going on at line 20. QB64, though, is a compiled BASIC. The BASIC gets transpiled to C++ before being compiled to an EXE. We would need to dissect the C++ code to see what the compiled program is doing. RE: Next without For - SMcNeill - 05-02-2025 The action makes sense to me. You skip the definition stage of the FOR so it's basically a DO.. LOOP type structure with: start = 0 finish = 0 increment = 0 i = start DO PRINT i i = i + increment LOOP UNTIL i > finish So... an endless loop of zeroes. RE: Next without For - eoredson - 05-02-2025 That makes sense. So the following is valid: This displays 5 and quits: Code: (Select All) 10 l = 5: GoTo 30 RE: Next without For - CharlieJV - 05-02-2025 (05-02-2025, 02:42 AM)CharlieJV Wrote:Just for the giggles, here is what BAM does:(05-02-2025, 02:19 AM)eoredson Wrote: Is this a bug or a feature?With the interpreted GW-BASIC, it gives that "Next without for" error, which makes sense. Being interpreted, going from line 10 to line 30, the program has no idea there is a For loop going on at line 20. RE: Next without For - bplus - 05-02-2025 Quote:Is this a bug or a feature? I say its a logic bug in your program, and the Next was not without a For the For is there! RE: Next without For - CharlieJV - 05-02-2025 (05-02-2025, 01:02 PM)bplus Wrote:Quote:Is this a bug or a feature? Yeah, but for an interpreter, it wouldn't know about the FOR because GOTO directed the execution flow to a point after the FOR? So when hitting the NEXT, the interpreter is saying "hey, I haven't seen a FOR for this NEXT". RE: Next without For - bplus - 05-02-2025 A clear case of GoTo abuse! RE: Next without For - Kernelpanic - 05-02-2025 Kind of confusing! My question: What are you smoking, eoredson? My recommendation: Stay away from it! Quote:bplus: A clear case of GoTo abuse!Ten points! Quote:SMcNeill: The action makes sense to me.Sure! If I want to go from New York to Cleveland Ohio, I'll obviously take the shortcut via Miami, Florida. ![]() RE: Next without For - eoredson - 05-02-2025 (05-02-2025, 03:31 PM)bplus Wrote: A clear case of GoTo abuse!You think that's abuse? Try this: Code: (Select All) V = _Exit |