Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search

[REBOL] Re: for bug?

From: joel:neely:fedex at: 17-Jun-2002 11:36

Hi, Romano, On Monday, June 17, 2002, at 10:26 AM, Romano Paolo Tenca wrote:
> Joel, i do not understand your for code, is missing something? > > if op end start [ > until [ > start: (old: start) + bump > ] > ] >
What's missing is the working part of the loop body. I stripped the loop down to just the "counter" management to see what would happen to the overhead timing in going to post-test. I think that a single range test wrapped around the post-test loop is much faster than putting another upper-limit test inside a pre-test loop. -jn-