Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>
> > REPEAT
> >   ...
> > UNTIL (condition);
>
> > which did exactly what I always expected it to do: Execute the list of
> > statements, *then* check for the condition, and if it didn't hold true, repeat
> > the whole smash over and over again.
>
>   The problem with that is that it will execute the body always at least
> once. If it should never be executed (which isn't even a rare occurrence),
> you will need to add a conditional around the entire repeat-until loop,
> and the condition will be a duplicate of the 'until' condition.

I didn't claim that to be the ideal loop. I just said it was the most intuitive
in my eyes.

Post a reply to this message