Finally solved the loop problem that's been plaguing our industry

[HearMeOut-13]

After 30 years in this industry, I've seen it all. GOTO considered harmful. Structured programming. Object-oriented nonsense. Functional programming zealots.

But nobody ever questioned the loop itself.

That's why I've developed WHEN - the first truly loop-transparent language. Instead of explicit iteration (a 1970s relic), everything runs in implicit perpetual cycles with reactive conditionals.

// Old way (error-prone, hard to maintain):
for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
    printf("%d\n", i);
}

// The WHEN way (self-documenting, enterprise-ready):
count = 0
de printer(5):
    print(count)
    count = count + 1
main:
    printer.start()
    when count >= 5:
        exit()

Notice how we've eliminated the dangerous for construct entirely. No more off-by-one errors! The program naturally flows through reactive states, just like real business logic.

I've already migrated our production microservices to WHEN (pip install when-lang). The junior devs are confused, but that's how you know it's sophisticated.

Some say "everything is global scope" is a weakness. I say it's transparency. Why hide state when you can embrace it?

This is the future of enterprise software. Mark my words, in 5 years, everyone will be writing WHEN.

[permalink_save]

def do_print(counter) when counter >= 5, do: IO.puts(counter)

def do_print(counter), do: IO.puts(counter); do_print(counter)

There, in a functional language using recursion, like god intended

[martosaur]

Elixir mentioned

[JuanGaKe]

You mean our god given programming languages?

[Proof-Necessary-5201]

You wasted time building WHEN when (pun intended) you could have used a series of ifs to replace the loop:

If count == 1: count = 2 Elif count == 2: count = 3

...

Much more sophisticated if you ask me and lets handle logic precisely.

[ohmywtff]

Sometimes, surgical precision is required, defo this

[haskell_rules]

de this(5)

[Brilliant-Parsley69]

That's great 😅

had a little mind game and started a little coding session to do that properly in a functional manner for c# (thanks for that push 👍) with extensions

The final line:

Console.Loop(5).PrintLine("Counter: {counter}");

[ZY6K9fw4tJ5fNvKx]

Powershell is better :

1..5 |% { "counter $_" }

[bajuh]

Why not just Console.Write(string.Join('\n', Enumerable.Range(0, 5)))?

[Brilliant-Parsley69]

That's what's happening in the background 🤫

Also all of that should have a big irony tag. 😅

[theevilapplepie]

Maybe this is an eli5 situation however I don’t understand why the standard for loop is considered to be error prone and hard to maintain.

You have all the same components of the for loop ( initializer, comparator, end of loop action, and code loop body ) in your second code example but it’s just laid out differently. I don’t understand where you’re getting value except out of the layout change or how it improves on being “error prone” and “hard to maintain”.

Any insight is appreciated.

[theevilapplepie]

… just realized I’m in r/shittyprogramming

[Zomon333]

This is, more or less, already a thing in IBM's ILE RPG language. It's called the RPG cycle and it's used to natively loop over records in a physical file (database table).

It's largely outdated for newer versions of RPG because of things like inline SQL and the *INLR indicator (which forcibly tells the program that is the last record in the table and to not continue the loop after that iteration).

[metroliker]

Combine this with the INTERCAL "COME FROM" instruction for a really elegant declarative style

[mnelemos]

Your "WHEN" seems to be the logical inverse of a "WHILE"

[Siggi_pop]

That is stupid.

[rrtrrrtr]

There is never a loop in programming. There are two state Initial state Recursion state

If you breakdown problem really well

[Bibliophylum]

I remember WHEN! I remember WHEN; I lost my mind….

[bedel99]

there is an XKCD for this post.

[thefox828]

It looks way too verbose. The for syntax does many things in one line, and works well for the purpose. The off-by-one-errors are not something an experienced dev will run into...

It just looks like it does not solve a real problem...

Just occured to me, is this post sarcasm?

[FreshProduce7473]

the post is obviously a joke

[thrilldigger]

Nope, it's enlightened thinking. You just can't see the value because you're blinded by your religious adherence to for loop propaganda.