12 Jan
1999
12 Jan
'99
1:24 p.m.
On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk wrote:
I wouldn't call FOR..NEXT low level. I'd call
it a high level
construction based on the low-level GOTO.
What I meant was, in the early BASICs, you would have to type out the FOR
loop with a variable, an increment, a conditional statement, and a goto.
In the later BASICs, you don't have to type it out, and it's also a lot
easier to understand that the NEXT X must be going back to that FOR X= 1
TO 10 I saw a while ago, as opposed to scrolling incessantly trying to
find where each GOTO leads.
I don't know exactly at what point the FOR...NEXT gets translated into its
components, but the point is, since it doesn't have to be typed out, it's
somewhat lower-level.
----------------------------------------------------
Max Eskin | kurtkilgor(a)bigfoot.com | AOL: kurtkilgor