>I think the behavior of automatically skipping the loop when the index is out
>of bounds is much more intuitive (and in line with other BASIC's and other
>languages like C).  However, FB's way is not that hard to work around, and I
>suppose we're probably stuck with it anyway.


I think this came up on the beta list a long time back in the early betas. If 
I remember correctly, it was decided that the best thing to do was to leave 
it as it is to stay compatible with FB II.

The reasoning behind it was that a change could break the flow of converted 
FB II programs that relied on going through the loop at least once. It would 
be hard to track down the problem in those existing programs because it may 
only happen occasionally depending on the values in the FOR line.


Al Staffieri Jr.

AlStaff@...
http://members.aol.com/AlStaff/index.html