even more delegate sugar

[Don Clugston]

Tom S wrote:
> Don Clugston wrote:
>> Oskar Linde wrote:
>>> Don Clugston wrote:
>>>> On reflection, an even more interesting example is variants of 
>>>> foreach, which I think would become completely redundant.
>>>
>>> break would pose a problem though.
>>
>> You're right.
>> Although foreach with opApply has the same problem.
> 
> Umm, nope...
> http://digitalmars.com/d/statement.html#foreach
> 
> Look at the opApply example. The delegate implementing foreach's body 
> returns != 0 in case of a break.

That's exactly what I meant. You can't use 'break' inside opApply, but 
of course it can be emulated, and the same solution could apply to 
Foreach function. It's just lacking in syntactic sugar (and probably in 
performance, too).

> It can be emulated thru e.g.
> return BREAK;
> or
> return CONTINUE;

> 
> 
> but if there was a way to define a function like:
> 
> outer.return myBreak() {
>     outer.return BREAK;
> }
> 
> ... then things could get even more bizarre ;)