Iteration Status

[shebs%utah-orion@utah-cs.arpa (Stanley Shebs)]

Is this topic dead?  I was going through an old MAIL.TXT and observed that
the last discussion of an iteration standard was over a year ago, and there
was very little consensus about the form or even a need for a general
iteration construct.  There are at least two portable iterator macros now,
a version of MIT LOOP done by Dave Miller at DePaul and a rendition of the
PSL FOR macro done by myself.  Neither of them is really acceptable as a
standard, although they are fine yellow pages material.

Personally, I've drifted into using DO and sequence functions, and find them
more convenient than trying to drag a library-type FOR module everywhere I go.
Others at Utah seem to have a similar viewpoint.  Do other people believe
that it's not worth the effort to define a general iterator?
If so, then perhaps this mailing list should be shut down.

								stan