Loops/With multiple ranges: Difference between revisions

Line 1,732:

Transcript show:'prod = '; showCR:prod</lang>

The above creates a temporary "collection of ranges" and enumerates that, which might be inconvenient, if the collections are huge.

<br>An alternative is to loop over each individually ~~(whichever you prefer)~~.

<br>One alternative is to loop over each individually.

Of course, we definitely don't want to retype the loop body

and we usually don't want to the code to be non-local (i.e. define another method for it).

<br>That's what blocks are perfect for:

<br>That's what blocks (aka lambdas or anonymous functions) are perfect for:

<lang smalltalk>prod := 1.

sum := 0.

Line 1,764:

Transcript show:'prod = '; showCR:prod</lang>

As an alternative to the first solution above, we ~~could~~ loop over the ranges. This avoids the concatenations and ~~possible~~ generation of the intermediate big collection - which does not make a difference here, but would, if each collection consisted of millions of objects):

As another alternative to the first solution above, we can loop over the ranges. This avoids the concatenations and generation of the intermediate big collection (which does not really make a difference here, but would, if each collection consisted of millions of objects):

<lang smalltalk>...

{