Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site dartvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!dartvax!alexc
From: alexc@dartvax.UUCP (Alex Colvin)
Newsgroups: net.lang.pascal
Subject: X3J11 (PASCAL) loops
Message-ID: <2356@dartvax.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 28-Aug-84 08:47:58 EDT
Article-I.D.: dartvax.2356
Posted: Tue Aug 28 08:47:58 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 30-Aug-84 10:34:25 EDT
Organization: Dartmouth College
Lines: 21

Personally, I find the new PASCAL standard on loop  variables  an
improvement.  I had been disappointed on reading J&W.

Perhaps because of Algol68  influence,  I  prefer  to  use  local
scalers  not  used elsewhere as loop variables.  I'm likely to be
embarrassed by finding some old program of  mine  broken,  but  I
think  I'd  consider this an improvement, like the discovery of a
long-hidden subscript bug.

Now... when is the committee going  to  do  something  about  the
statement  in J&W Ch.11, p. 71 (at least in the 1974 edition) re-
quiring that actual variable parameters be "distinct" (undefined,
but  presumably  meaning "not overlapping")?  This appears in the
User's Manual section, but not the Report.

Another feature that I try to avoid is assigning to value parame-
ters.   It's  often  a  good  idea  to leave the original (actual
parameter) value lying around, and make a local  copy  if  you're
going  to  use  it as a local variable.  I guess that I wish that
assignment to value parameters were an error.  I've been nailed a
few times by forgetting the "var" in a procedure header.