These keywords wouldn’t necessarily be unwelcome to me. Others may disagree.

However, most importantly, this is not an important feature that *solves a problem*. It has the effect of making certain things for beginners a little bit easier. That’s not a bad addition.

Less importantly, this feature is not and, probably, will never be a concern of a study group because it is not a pressing issue that users are demanding. Networking, performance, and education, for example, are.

WL

> On Apr 30, 2022, at 5:59 AM, Marcin Jaczewski via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> Why not simply use `for (auto x : y)`?
>
> ```
> for (auto i : infinity()) { } //could write to volatile memory to avoid UB
> for (auto i : std::views::iota(1, 10)) { }
> for (auto i : unitil([&]{ return true; })) { }
> for (auto i : rep_until([&]{ return true; })) { }
> ```
>
> sob., 30 kwi 2022 o 07:50 Abdullah Qasim via Std-Proposals
> <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> napisał(a):
>>
>> OK, I take it back.
>>
>> It is better implemented as keywords
>>
>>
>>
>> From: William Linkmeyer via Std-Proposals
>> Sent: 28 April 2022 22:05
>> To: std-proposals_at_[hidden]
>> Cc: William Linkmeyer
>> Subject: Re: [std-proposals] MACROS
>>
>>
>>
>> +1 — this would be a highly unusual addition to the standard.
>>
>>>> On Apr 28, 2022, at 12:58 PM, Jason McKesson via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>
>>> You failed to present any motivation for these changes. Furthermore, I
>>> don't know why we would want to add a bunch of macros (which cannot be
>>> imported from a module) for such trivial things. Since we got
>>> range-based for loops, the number of times I've had to loop over a
>>> count is dramatically reduced. And with `ranges::iota` or similar
>>> tools, that's now pretty much never. Having a way to spell
>>> `while(!expr)` seems pointless; just read the expression.
>>>
>>> And `rep` is just a bad idea. `while(true)` is an incredibly dangerous
>>> thing with a myriad of side-effects (if you don't do certain things in
>>> the loop, the forward progress guarantees of the standard allow the
>>> compiler to straight-up drop the loop body). It's sufficiently
>>> dangerous that we should absolutely not have a short-form version of
>>> it.
>>> --
>>> Std-Proposals mailing list
>>> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
>>> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>> --
>> Std-Proposals mailing list
>> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
>> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Std-Proposals mailing list
>> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
>> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals