Re: [Gretl-devel] revision of index loop?
Am 13.08.2018 um 18:14 schrieb Allin Cottrell:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2018, Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti wrote:
It's not exactly buggy if the coder is relying on the documented
behavior of gretl's index loop. But the inner loop will reach
j = n+1..n, which is a problem for an n x n matrix unless it's blocked.
Quoting from the guide: "...with values m > n at the time of execution,
the index will not be
decremented; rather, the loop will simply be bypassed."
So this is pretty explicitly documented behavior, and therefere I'd feel
uneasy to break this. After all, "This form of loop control is intended
to be quick and easy..." "If you need more complex loop control, see the
'for' form below".
> Given the potential for breakage, I'm not a great fan of the
> --decrement option, especially considering that the alternative is
> relatively painless in all the examples I can think of.
I agree the alternative
is painless, but I don't really get the argument
why there would be the danger of breakage with --decrement? So that
option seems OK to me, the only downside being that this syntactic sugar
may be more confusing than helping (not sure).
thanks
sven