- Problem
- Background
- Proposal
- Details
- Caveats
- Rationale based on Carbon's goals
- Alternatives considered
while
is noted in the language overview, but
is provisional. Control flow is important, and while
is basic; the form is
similar in many languages, even if details may change.
-
C++: A couple example languages following C++'s syntax closely are Java and TypeScript.
while (x) { DoSomething(); } do { DoSomethingElse(); } while (y);
-
Python: Python does not provide
do
/while
. However, theelse
syntax for having code execute if the condition is never true may be of interest.while x: DoSomething() while True: DoSomethingElse() if not y: break while z: print("z is true") else: print("z was never true")
-
Swift: Swift uses
repeat
instead ofdo
.while x { DoSomething() } repeat { DoSomethingElse() } while y
-
Rust: Rust provides only a basic
while
loop, relying on the condition-lessloop
to achievedo
/while
-like behavior.while x { DoSomething(); } loop { DoSomethingElse(); if (!y) { break; } }
-
Go: Go has no
while
loops, onlyfor
loops. However, afor
can be written similar to awhile
.for x { DoSomething() } for { DoSomethingElse(); if !y { break; } }
Carbon should adopt while
loop syntax consistent with C and C++. In
particular, it should adopt these three kinds of statements:
while
: declares that we're doing a loop, containing the condition.continue
: continues with the next loop iteration, starting with the loop condition.break
: breaks out of the loop, without testing the loop condition.
Loop syntax looks like:
while (
boolean expression) {
statements}
While will evaluate the loop condition before each pass of the loop, only continuing if the loop condition is true. When the loop condition evaluates to false, the loop completes.
Similar to the
if
/else
proposal,
the braces are optional and must be paired ({ ... }
) if present. When there
are no braces, only one statement is allowed.
continue
will continue with the next loop iteration directly, skipping any
other statements in the loop body. The next loop iteration behaves as normal,
starting with the condition being tested.
break
exits the loop immediately, without testing the condition.
All of this is consistent with C and C++ behavior.
%token WHILE
%token CONTINUE
%token BREAK
statement:
WHILE '(' expression ')' statement
| CONTINUE ';'
| BREAK ';'
| /* preexisting statements elided */
;
Note that continue
and break
should only be valid in a loop context.
This baseline syntax is based on C++, following the migration sub-goal Familiarity for experienced C++ developers with a gentle learning curve. To the extent that this proposal anchors on a particular approach, it aims to anchor on C++'s existing syntax, consistent with that sub-goal.
Alternatives will generally reflect breaking consistency with C++ syntax. While most proposals may consider alternatives more, this proposal suggests a threshold of only accepting alternatives that skew from C++ syntax if they are clearly better; the priority in this proposal is to avoid debate and produce a trivial proposal. Where an alternative would trigger debate, it should be examined by an advocate in a separate proposal.
do
/while
is omitted from this proposal because of disagreement about whether
it should be included in Carbon. It's better to have do
/while
considered
separately as a result, in order to separate review of the non-contentious
while
.
Relevant goals are:
-
3. Code that is easy to read, understand, and write:
while
loops are easy to read and very helpful.
-
7. Interoperability with and migration from existing C++ code:
- Keeping syntax close to C++ will make it easier for developers to transition.
Both alternatives from the
if
/else
proposal
apply to while
as well: we could remove parentheses, require braces, or both.
The conclusions mirror here in order to avoid a divergence in syntax.
Additional alternatives follow.
Various non-C++ features that came up and are not suggested by this proposal because they aren't in C++ are:
else
onwhile
, as in Python.- A
loop
statement withwhile(true)
behavior, as in Rust. - Labeled break and continue statements, as in Java or TypeScript.
These may be added later, but they are not part of the C++ baseline, and have not received much consideration beyond that adopting the proposed syntax would not significantly impair adoption of such features.
This proposal does not offer a way to initialize variables in the while
.
For comparison, C++ does allow declaring a variable in the condition, such as:
while (optional<T> next = get_next()) { ... }
In addition,
Selections statements with initializer
could be inferred to suggest a corresponding while (init; cond)
syntax.
Neither of these is suggested in this proposal because we are likely to consider
a different route of allowing declaration of a variable in expressions. For
example, the following would be legal not because while
would use a
condition
semantic that allows variable declarations as a form, but because it
uses expression
semantics and var
would be part of expression
semantics:
while (var optional<T> next = get_next()) { ... }
In particular, this would also allow more flexible usage addressing more complex use-cases that C++ does not, such as:
while ((var status_code c = bar()) != SUCCESS) { ... }`
This breaks slightly from the C++ baseline by offering a
subset of C++ functionality. However, we can choose to add related functionality
later if expression
semantics end up not including var
. Temporarily omitting
condition
functionality avoids having to reconcile it later if we pursue the
expression
route, and it is not crucial to while
loop functionality.