æʃliŋ, loaf of autismo @aescling@cat.family

@wallhackio @monorail @vaporeon_ please tell me you OiI’d that Iife

@monorail @wallhackio baaaaall-eevee or not, i’m walking on air

@monorail @wallhackio that is a good wisdom

@monorail @wallhackio damn holly how did you get so wise

@wallhackio @monorail it would increment by 1, then 2, then 3…

@wallhackio @monorail no.

@monorail @wallhackio i would pat your head but im tiny and you’re all the way up there

@monorail @wallhackio link 404s?

@wallhackio @monorail idx should increment by 1 which is not what either of those would do

@vaporeon_ @wallhackio well.

let isErr = false;
err: {
    if (isErr) {
        // ...
    } else {
        // ...
            isErr = true;
            break err;
        // ...
    }
}

but that's terrible lol

@vaporeon_ @wallhackio like idk how you’d do the goto err; pattern with something like this

@wallhackio @vaporeon_ blocks are also statements iirc

@vaporeon_ @wallhackio you can purrobably do cool nasty hacks with them since the labeled statement can seemingly just be an arbitrary code block

label1: {
    // ...
}

but idk it seems a bit limited

@vaporeon_ kind of but not really

@wallhackio @vaporeon_ to be clear the one liner was not remotely a serious suggestion, it'd be terrible

@vaporeon_ @alas @wallhackio but anyway, if you wrote a loop ending in i++ in the body, my furst thought would be “this is a for loop”

@vaporeon_ @alas @wallhackio you dropped the i increment

@wallhackio @vaporeon_ i bet you could write this loop in the form for (; [nasty conditional]; i++) { }, which would be the funniest option