Instruction
stringlengths
45
106
input_code
stringlengths
1
13.7k
output_code
stringlengths
1
13.7k
Rewrite the snippet below in Python so it works the same as the original Nim code.
block outer: for i in 0..1000: for j in 0..1000: if i + j == 3: break outer
from goto import goto, label label .start for i in range(1, 4): print i if i == 2: try: output = message except NameError: print "Oops - forgot to define 'message'! Start again." message = "Hello world" goto .start print output, "\n"
Change the programming language of this snippet from Nim to VB without modifying what it does.
block outer: for i in 0..1000: for j in 0..1000: if i + j == 3: break outer
Public Sub jump() Debug.Print "VBA only allows" GoTo 1 Debug.Print "no global jumps" 1: Debug.Print "jumps in procedures with GoTo" Debug.Print "However," On 2 GoSub one, two Debug.Print "named in the list after Debug.Print "and execution will continue on the next line" On 1 GoTo one, two Debug.Print "For On Error, see Exceptions" one: Debug.Print "On <n> GoTo let you jump to the n-th label" Debug.Print "and won Exit Sub two: Debug.Print "On <n> GoSub let you jump to the n-th label": Return End Sub
Port the following code from Nim to VB with equivalent syntax and logic.
block outer: for i in 0..1000: for j in 0..1000: if i + j == 3: break outer
Public Sub jump() Debug.Print "VBA only allows" GoTo 1 Debug.Print "no global jumps" 1: Debug.Print "jumps in procedures with GoTo" Debug.Print "However," On 2 GoSub one, two Debug.Print "named in the list after Debug.Print "and execution will continue on the next line" On 1 GoTo one, two Debug.Print "For On Error, see Exceptions" one: Debug.Print "On <n> GoTo let you jump to the n-th label" Debug.Print "and won Exit Sub two: Debug.Print "On <n> GoSub let you jump to the n-th label": Return End Sub
Convert this Nim block to Go, preserving its control flow and logic.
block outer: for i in 0..1000: for j in 0..1000: if i + j == 3: break outer
package main import "fmt" func main() { outer: for i := 0; i < 4; i++ { for j := 0; j < 4; j++ { if i + j == 4 { continue outer } if i + j == 5 { break outer } fmt.Println(i + j) } } k := 3 if k == 3 { goto later } fmt.Println(k) later: k++ fmt.Println(k) }
Write a version of this Nim function in Go with identical behavior.
block outer: for i in 0..1000: for j in 0..1000: if i + j == 3: break outer
package main import "fmt" func main() { outer: for i := 0; i < 4; i++ { for j := 0; j < 4; j++ { if i + j == 4 { continue outer } if i + j == 5 { break outer } fmt.Println(i + j) } } k := 3 if k == 3 { goto later } fmt.Println(k) later: k++ fmt.Println(k) }
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from Perl to C, same semantics.
sub outer { print "In outer, calling inner:\n"; inner(); OUTER: print "at label OUTER\n"; } sub inner { print "In inner\n"; goto SKIP; print "This should be skipped\n"; SKIP: print "at label SKIP\n"; goto OUTER; print "Inner should never reach here\n"; } sub disguise { goto &outer; print "Can't reach this statement\n"; } print "Calling outer:\n"; outer(); print "\nCalling disguise:\n"; disguise(); print "\nCalling inner:\n"; inner();
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: printf("pos\n"); goto both; negative: printf("neg\n"); both: ...
Rewrite the snippet below in C so it works the same as the original Perl code.
sub outer { print "In outer, calling inner:\n"; inner(); OUTER: print "at label OUTER\n"; } sub inner { print "In inner\n"; goto SKIP; print "This should be skipped\n"; SKIP: print "at label SKIP\n"; goto OUTER; print "Inner should never reach here\n"; } sub disguise { goto &outer; print "Can't reach this statement\n"; } print "Calling outer:\n"; outer(); print "\nCalling disguise:\n"; disguise(); print "\nCalling inner:\n"; inner();
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: printf("pos\n"); goto both; negative: printf("neg\n"); both: ...
Keep all operations the same but rewrite the snippet in C#.
sub outer { print "In outer, calling inner:\n"; inner(); OUTER: print "at label OUTER\n"; } sub inner { print "In inner\n"; goto SKIP; print "This should be skipped\n"; SKIP: print "at label SKIP\n"; goto OUTER; print "Inner should never reach here\n"; } sub disguise { goto &outer; print "Can't reach this statement\n"; } print "Calling outer:\n"; outer(); print "\nCalling disguise:\n"; disguise(); print "\nCalling inner:\n"; inner();
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: Console.WriteLine("pos\n"); goto both; negative: Console.WriteLine("neg\n"); both: ...
Rewrite the snippet below in C# so it works the same as the original Perl code.
sub outer { print "In outer, calling inner:\n"; inner(); OUTER: print "at label OUTER\n"; } sub inner { print "In inner\n"; goto SKIP; print "This should be skipped\n"; SKIP: print "at label SKIP\n"; goto OUTER; print "Inner should never reach here\n"; } sub disguise { goto &outer; print "Can't reach this statement\n"; } print "Calling outer:\n"; outer(); print "\nCalling disguise:\n"; disguise(); print "\nCalling inner:\n"; inner();
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: Console.WriteLine("pos\n"); goto both; negative: Console.WriteLine("neg\n"); both: ...
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from Perl to C++, same semantics.
sub outer { print "In outer, calling inner:\n"; inner(); OUTER: print "at label OUTER\n"; } sub inner { print "In inner\n"; goto SKIP; print "This should be skipped\n"; SKIP: print "at label SKIP\n"; goto OUTER; print "Inner should never reach here\n"; } sub disguise { goto &outer; print "Can't reach this statement\n"; } print "Calling outer:\n"; outer(); print "\nCalling disguise:\n"; disguise(); print "\nCalling inner:\n"; inner();
#include <iostream> #include <utility> using namespace std; int main(void) { cout << "Find a solution to i = 2 * j - 7\n"; pair<int, int> answer; for(int i = 0; true; i++) { for(int j = 0; j < i; j++) { if( i == 2 * j - 7) { answer = make_pair(i, j); goto loopexit; } } } loopexit: cout << answer.first << " = 2 * " << answer.second << " - 7\n\n"; goto spagetti; int k; k = 9; spagetti: cout << "k = " << k << "\n"; }
Produce a functionally identical C++ code for the snippet given in Perl.
sub outer { print "In outer, calling inner:\n"; inner(); OUTER: print "at label OUTER\n"; } sub inner { print "In inner\n"; goto SKIP; print "This should be skipped\n"; SKIP: print "at label SKIP\n"; goto OUTER; print "Inner should never reach here\n"; } sub disguise { goto &outer; print "Can't reach this statement\n"; } print "Calling outer:\n"; outer(); print "\nCalling disguise:\n"; disguise(); print "\nCalling inner:\n"; inner();
#include <iostream> #include <utility> using namespace std; int main(void) { cout << "Find a solution to i = 2 * j - 7\n"; pair<int, int> answer; for(int i = 0; true; i++) { for(int j = 0; j < i; j++) { if( i == 2 * j - 7) { answer = make_pair(i, j); goto loopexit; } } } loopexit: cout << answer.first << " = 2 * " << answer.second << " - 7\n\n"; goto spagetti; int k; k = 9; spagetti: cout << "k = " << k << "\n"; }
Maintain the same structure and functionality when rewriting this code in Java.
sub outer { print "In outer, calling inner:\n"; inner(); OUTER: print "at label OUTER\n"; } sub inner { print "In inner\n"; goto SKIP; print "This should be skipped\n"; SKIP: print "at label SKIP\n"; goto OUTER; print "Inner should never reach here\n"; } sub disguise { goto &outer; print "Can't reach this statement\n"; } print "Calling outer:\n"; outer(); print "\nCalling disguise:\n"; disguise(); print "\nCalling inner:\n"; inner();
loop1: while (x != 0) { loop2: for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { loop3: do { if () { continue loop1; } if () { break loop2; } } while (y < 10); } }
Can you help me rewrite this code in Java instead of Perl, keeping it the same logically?
sub outer { print "In outer, calling inner:\n"; inner(); OUTER: print "at label OUTER\n"; } sub inner { print "In inner\n"; goto SKIP; print "This should be skipped\n"; SKIP: print "at label SKIP\n"; goto OUTER; print "Inner should never reach here\n"; } sub disguise { goto &outer; print "Can't reach this statement\n"; } print "Calling outer:\n"; outer(); print "\nCalling disguise:\n"; disguise(); print "\nCalling inner:\n"; inner();
loop1: while (x != 0) { loop2: for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { loop3: do { if () { continue loop1; } if () { break loop2; } } while (y < 10); } }
Ensure the translated Python code behaves exactly like the original Perl snippet.
sub outer { print "In outer, calling inner:\n"; inner(); OUTER: print "at label OUTER\n"; } sub inner { print "In inner\n"; goto SKIP; print "This should be skipped\n"; SKIP: print "at label SKIP\n"; goto OUTER; print "Inner should never reach here\n"; } sub disguise { goto &outer; print "Can't reach this statement\n"; } print "Calling outer:\n"; outer(); print "\nCalling disguise:\n"; disguise(); print "\nCalling inner:\n"; inner();
from goto import goto, label label .start for i in range(1, 4): print i if i == 2: try: output = message except NameError: print "Oops - forgot to define 'message'! Start again." message = "Hello world" goto .start print output, "\n"
Change the following Perl code into Python without altering its purpose.
sub outer { print "In outer, calling inner:\n"; inner(); OUTER: print "at label OUTER\n"; } sub inner { print "In inner\n"; goto SKIP; print "This should be skipped\n"; SKIP: print "at label SKIP\n"; goto OUTER; print "Inner should never reach here\n"; } sub disguise { goto &outer; print "Can't reach this statement\n"; } print "Calling outer:\n"; outer(); print "\nCalling disguise:\n"; disguise(); print "\nCalling inner:\n"; inner();
from goto import goto, label label .start for i in range(1, 4): print i if i == 2: try: output = message except NameError: print "Oops - forgot to define 'message'! Start again." message = "Hello world" goto .start print output, "\n"
Change the following Perl code into VB without altering its purpose.
sub outer { print "In outer, calling inner:\n"; inner(); OUTER: print "at label OUTER\n"; } sub inner { print "In inner\n"; goto SKIP; print "This should be skipped\n"; SKIP: print "at label SKIP\n"; goto OUTER; print "Inner should never reach here\n"; } sub disguise { goto &outer; print "Can't reach this statement\n"; } print "Calling outer:\n"; outer(); print "\nCalling disguise:\n"; disguise(); print "\nCalling inner:\n"; inner();
Public Sub jump() Debug.Print "VBA only allows" GoTo 1 Debug.Print "no global jumps" 1: Debug.Print "jumps in procedures with GoTo" Debug.Print "However," On 2 GoSub one, two Debug.Print "named in the list after Debug.Print "and execution will continue on the next line" On 1 GoTo one, two Debug.Print "For On Error, see Exceptions" one: Debug.Print "On <n> GoTo let you jump to the n-th label" Debug.Print "and won Exit Sub two: Debug.Print "On <n> GoSub let you jump to the n-th label": Return End Sub
Change the programming language of this snippet from Perl to VB without modifying what it does.
sub outer { print "In outer, calling inner:\n"; inner(); OUTER: print "at label OUTER\n"; } sub inner { print "In inner\n"; goto SKIP; print "This should be skipped\n"; SKIP: print "at label SKIP\n"; goto OUTER; print "Inner should never reach here\n"; } sub disguise { goto &outer; print "Can't reach this statement\n"; } print "Calling outer:\n"; outer(); print "\nCalling disguise:\n"; disguise(); print "\nCalling inner:\n"; inner();
Public Sub jump() Debug.Print "VBA only allows" GoTo 1 Debug.Print "no global jumps" 1: Debug.Print "jumps in procedures with GoTo" Debug.Print "However," On 2 GoSub one, two Debug.Print "named in the list after Debug.Print "and execution will continue on the next line" On 1 GoTo one, two Debug.Print "For On Error, see Exceptions" one: Debug.Print "On <n> GoTo let you jump to the n-th label" Debug.Print "and won Exit Sub two: Debug.Print "On <n> GoSub let you jump to the n-th label": Return End Sub
Generate a Go translation of this Perl snippet without changing its computational steps.
sub outer { print "In outer, calling inner:\n"; inner(); OUTER: print "at label OUTER\n"; } sub inner { print "In inner\n"; goto SKIP; print "This should be skipped\n"; SKIP: print "at label SKIP\n"; goto OUTER; print "Inner should never reach here\n"; } sub disguise { goto &outer; print "Can't reach this statement\n"; } print "Calling outer:\n"; outer(); print "\nCalling disguise:\n"; disguise(); print "\nCalling inner:\n"; inner();
package main import "fmt" func main() { outer: for i := 0; i < 4; i++ { for j := 0; j < 4; j++ { if i + j == 4 { continue outer } if i + j == 5 { break outer } fmt.Println(i + j) } } k := 3 if k == 3 { goto later } fmt.Println(k) later: k++ fmt.Println(k) }
Write the same algorithm in Go as shown in this Perl implementation.
sub outer { print "In outer, calling inner:\n"; inner(); OUTER: print "at label OUTER\n"; } sub inner { print "In inner\n"; goto SKIP; print "This should be skipped\n"; SKIP: print "at label SKIP\n"; goto OUTER; print "Inner should never reach here\n"; } sub disguise { goto &outer; print "Can't reach this statement\n"; } print "Calling outer:\n"; outer(); print "\nCalling disguise:\n"; disguise(); print "\nCalling inner:\n"; inner();
package main import "fmt" func main() { outer: for i := 0; i < 4; i++ { for j := 0; j < 4; j++ { if i + j == 4 { continue outer } if i + j == 5 { break outer } fmt.Println(i + j) } } k := 3 if k == 3 { goto later } fmt.Println(k) later: k++ fmt.Println(k) }
Write a version of this PowerShell function in C with identical behavior.
:myLabel while (<condition>) { <statement list>}
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: printf("pos\n"); goto both; negative: printf("neg\n"); both: ...
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from PowerShell to C, same semantics.
:myLabel while (<condition>) { <statement list>}
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: printf("pos\n"); goto both; negative: printf("neg\n"); both: ...
Preserve the algorithm and functionality while converting the code from PowerShell to C#.
:myLabel while (<condition>) { <statement list>}
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: Console.WriteLine("pos\n"); goto both; negative: Console.WriteLine("neg\n"); both: ...
Transform the following PowerShell implementation into C#, maintaining the same output and logic.
:myLabel while (<condition>) { <statement list>}
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: Console.WriteLine("pos\n"); goto both; negative: Console.WriteLine("neg\n"); both: ...
Convert the following code from PowerShell to C++, ensuring the logic remains intact.
:myLabel while (<condition>) { <statement list>}
#include <iostream> #include <utility> using namespace std; int main(void) { cout << "Find a solution to i = 2 * j - 7\n"; pair<int, int> answer; for(int i = 0; true; i++) { for(int j = 0; j < i; j++) { if( i == 2 * j - 7) { answer = make_pair(i, j); goto loopexit; } } } loopexit: cout << answer.first << " = 2 * " << answer.second << " - 7\n\n"; goto spagetti; int k; k = 9; spagetti: cout << "k = " << k << "\n"; }
Convert this PowerShell snippet to C++ and keep its semantics consistent.
:myLabel while (<condition>) { <statement list>}
#include <iostream> #include <utility> using namespace std; int main(void) { cout << "Find a solution to i = 2 * j - 7\n"; pair<int, int> answer; for(int i = 0; true; i++) { for(int j = 0; j < i; j++) { if( i == 2 * j - 7) { answer = make_pair(i, j); goto loopexit; } } } loopexit: cout << answer.first << " = 2 * " << answer.second << " - 7\n\n"; goto spagetti; int k; k = 9; spagetti: cout << "k = " << k << "\n"; }
Translate this program into Java but keep the logic exactly as in PowerShell.
:myLabel while (<condition>) { <statement list>}
loop1: while (x != 0) { loop2: for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { loop3: do { if () { continue loop1; } if () { break loop2; } } while (y < 10); } }
Translate this program into Java but keep the logic exactly as in PowerShell.
:myLabel while (<condition>) { <statement list>}
loop1: while (x != 0) { loop2: for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { loop3: do { if () { continue loop1; } if () { break loop2; } } while (y < 10); } }
Write the same code in Python as shown below in PowerShell.
:myLabel while (<condition>) { <statement list>}
from goto import goto, label label .start for i in range(1, 4): print i if i == 2: try: output = message except NameError: print "Oops - forgot to define 'message'! Start again." message = "Hello world" goto .start print output, "\n"
Write the same code in Python as shown below in PowerShell.
:myLabel while (<condition>) { <statement list>}
from goto import goto, label label .start for i in range(1, 4): print i if i == 2: try: output = message except NameError: print "Oops - forgot to define 'message'! Start again." message = "Hello world" goto .start print output, "\n"
Write a version of this PowerShell function in VB with identical behavior.
:myLabel while (<condition>) { <statement list>}
Public Sub jump() Debug.Print "VBA only allows" GoTo 1 Debug.Print "no global jumps" 1: Debug.Print "jumps in procedures with GoTo" Debug.Print "However," On 2 GoSub one, two Debug.Print "named in the list after Debug.Print "and execution will continue on the next line" On 1 GoTo one, two Debug.Print "For On Error, see Exceptions" one: Debug.Print "On <n> GoTo let you jump to the n-th label" Debug.Print "and won Exit Sub two: Debug.Print "On <n> GoSub let you jump to the n-th label": Return End Sub
Convert this PowerShell block to VB, preserving its control flow and logic.
:myLabel while (<condition>) { <statement list>}
Public Sub jump() Debug.Print "VBA only allows" GoTo 1 Debug.Print "no global jumps" 1: Debug.Print "jumps in procedures with GoTo" Debug.Print "However," On 2 GoSub one, two Debug.Print "named in the list after Debug.Print "and execution will continue on the next line" On 1 GoTo one, two Debug.Print "For On Error, see Exceptions" one: Debug.Print "On <n> GoTo let you jump to the n-th label" Debug.Print "and won Exit Sub two: Debug.Print "On <n> GoSub let you jump to the n-th label": Return End Sub
Convert this PowerShell snippet to Go and keep its semantics consistent.
:myLabel while (<condition>) { <statement list>}
package main import "fmt" func main() { outer: for i := 0; i < 4; i++ { for j := 0; j < 4; j++ { if i + j == 4 { continue outer } if i + j == 5 { break outer } fmt.Println(i + j) } } k := 3 if k == 3 { goto later } fmt.Println(k) later: k++ fmt.Println(k) }
Generate an equivalent Go version of this PowerShell code.
:myLabel while (<condition>) { <statement list>}
package main import "fmt" func main() { outer: for i := 0; i < 4; i++ { for j := 0; j < 4; j++ { if i + j == 4 { continue outer } if i + j == 5 { break outer } fmt.Println(i + j) } } k := 3 if k == 3 { goto later } fmt.Println(k) later: k++ fmt.Println(k) }
Change the following Racket code into C without altering its purpose.
#lang racket (define (never-divides-by-zero return) (displayln "I'm here") (return "Leaving") (displayln "Never going to reach this") (/ 1 0)) (call/cc never-divides-by-zero)
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: printf("pos\n"); goto both; negative: printf("neg\n"); both: ...
Preserve the algorithm and functionality while converting the code from Racket to C.
#lang racket (define (never-divides-by-zero return) (displayln "I'm here") (return "Leaving") (displayln "Never going to reach this") (/ 1 0)) (call/cc never-divides-by-zero)
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: printf("pos\n"); goto both; negative: printf("neg\n"); both: ...
Keep all operations the same but rewrite the snippet in C#.
#lang racket (define (never-divides-by-zero return) (displayln "I'm here") (return "Leaving") (displayln "Never going to reach this") (/ 1 0)) (call/cc never-divides-by-zero)
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: Console.WriteLine("pos\n"); goto both; negative: Console.WriteLine("neg\n"); both: ...
Change the following Racket code into C# without altering its purpose.
#lang racket (define (never-divides-by-zero return) (displayln "I'm here") (return "Leaving") (displayln "Never going to reach this") (/ 1 0)) (call/cc never-divides-by-zero)
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: Console.WriteLine("pos\n"); goto both; negative: Console.WriteLine("neg\n"); both: ...
Change the following Racket code into C++ without altering its purpose.
#lang racket (define (never-divides-by-zero return) (displayln "I'm here") (return "Leaving") (displayln "Never going to reach this") (/ 1 0)) (call/cc never-divides-by-zero)
#include <iostream> #include <utility> using namespace std; int main(void) { cout << "Find a solution to i = 2 * j - 7\n"; pair<int, int> answer; for(int i = 0; true; i++) { for(int j = 0; j < i; j++) { if( i == 2 * j - 7) { answer = make_pair(i, j); goto loopexit; } } } loopexit: cout << answer.first << " = 2 * " << answer.second << " - 7\n\n"; goto spagetti; int k; k = 9; spagetti: cout << "k = " << k << "\n"; }
Ensure the translated C++ code behaves exactly like the original Racket snippet.
#lang racket (define (never-divides-by-zero return) (displayln "I'm here") (return "Leaving") (displayln "Never going to reach this") (/ 1 0)) (call/cc never-divides-by-zero)
#include <iostream> #include <utility> using namespace std; int main(void) { cout << "Find a solution to i = 2 * j - 7\n"; pair<int, int> answer; for(int i = 0; true; i++) { for(int j = 0; j < i; j++) { if( i == 2 * j - 7) { answer = make_pair(i, j); goto loopexit; } } } loopexit: cout << answer.first << " = 2 * " << answer.second << " - 7\n\n"; goto spagetti; int k; k = 9; spagetti: cout << "k = " << k << "\n"; }
Rewrite this program in Java while keeping its functionality equivalent to the Racket version.
#lang racket (define (never-divides-by-zero return) (displayln "I'm here") (return "Leaving") (displayln "Never going to reach this") (/ 1 0)) (call/cc never-divides-by-zero)
loop1: while (x != 0) { loop2: for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { loop3: do { if () { continue loop1; } if () { break loop2; } } while (y < 10); } }
Rewrite this program in Java while keeping its functionality equivalent to the Racket version.
#lang racket (define (never-divides-by-zero return) (displayln "I'm here") (return "Leaving") (displayln "Never going to reach this") (/ 1 0)) (call/cc never-divides-by-zero)
loop1: while (x != 0) { loop2: for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { loop3: do { if () { continue loop1; } if () { break loop2; } } while (y < 10); } }
Write the same code in Python as shown below in Racket.
#lang racket (define (never-divides-by-zero return) (displayln "I'm here") (return "Leaving") (displayln "Never going to reach this") (/ 1 0)) (call/cc never-divides-by-zero)
from goto import goto, label label .start for i in range(1, 4): print i if i == 2: try: output = message except NameError: print "Oops - forgot to define 'message'! Start again." message = "Hello world" goto .start print output, "\n"
Transform the following Racket implementation into Python, maintaining the same output and logic.
#lang racket (define (never-divides-by-zero return) (displayln "I'm here") (return "Leaving") (displayln "Never going to reach this") (/ 1 0)) (call/cc never-divides-by-zero)
from goto import goto, label label .start for i in range(1, 4): print i if i == 2: try: output = message except NameError: print "Oops - forgot to define 'message'! Start again." message = "Hello world" goto .start print output, "\n"
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from Racket to VB, same semantics.
#lang racket (define (never-divides-by-zero return) (displayln "I'm here") (return "Leaving") (displayln "Never going to reach this") (/ 1 0)) (call/cc never-divides-by-zero)
Public Sub jump() Debug.Print "VBA only allows" GoTo 1 Debug.Print "no global jumps" 1: Debug.Print "jumps in procedures with GoTo" Debug.Print "However," On 2 GoSub one, two Debug.Print "named in the list after Debug.Print "and execution will continue on the next line" On 1 GoTo one, two Debug.Print "For On Error, see Exceptions" one: Debug.Print "On <n> GoTo let you jump to the n-th label" Debug.Print "and won Exit Sub two: Debug.Print "On <n> GoSub let you jump to the n-th label": Return End Sub
Rewrite the snippet below in VB so it works the same as the original Racket code.
#lang racket (define (never-divides-by-zero return) (displayln "I'm here") (return "Leaving") (displayln "Never going to reach this") (/ 1 0)) (call/cc never-divides-by-zero)
Public Sub jump() Debug.Print "VBA only allows" GoTo 1 Debug.Print "no global jumps" 1: Debug.Print "jumps in procedures with GoTo" Debug.Print "However," On 2 GoSub one, two Debug.Print "named in the list after Debug.Print "and execution will continue on the next line" On 1 GoTo one, two Debug.Print "For On Error, see Exceptions" one: Debug.Print "On <n> GoTo let you jump to the n-th label" Debug.Print "and won Exit Sub two: Debug.Print "On <n> GoSub let you jump to the n-th label": Return End Sub
Write the same code in Go as shown below in Racket.
#lang racket (define (never-divides-by-zero return) (displayln "I'm here") (return "Leaving") (displayln "Never going to reach this") (/ 1 0)) (call/cc never-divides-by-zero)
package main import "fmt" func main() { outer: for i := 0; i < 4; i++ { for j := 0; j < 4; j++ { if i + j == 4 { continue outer } if i + j == 5 { break outer } fmt.Println(i + j) } } k := 3 if k == 3 { goto later } fmt.Println(k) later: k++ fmt.Println(k) }
Rewrite this program in Go while keeping its functionality equivalent to the Racket version.
#lang racket (define (never-divides-by-zero return) (displayln "I'm here") (return "Leaving") (displayln "Never going to reach this") (/ 1 0)) (call/cc never-divides-by-zero)
package main import "fmt" func main() { outer: for i := 0; i < 4; i++ { for j := 0; j < 4; j++ { if i + j == 4 { continue outer } if i + j == 5 { break outer } fmt.Println(i + j) } } k := 3 if k == 3 { goto later } fmt.Println(k) later: k++ fmt.Println(k) }
Generate an equivalent C version of this COBOL code.
IDENTIFICATION DIVISION. PROGRAM-ID. JUMPS-PROGRAM. * Nobody writes like this, of course; but... PROCEDURE DIVISION. * You can jump anywhere you like. START-PARAGRAPH. GO TO AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. ALTER START-PARAGRAPH TO PROCEED TO A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. * That's right, folks: we don't just have GO TOs, we have GO TOs whose * destinations can be changed at will, from anywhere in the program, * at run time. GO TO START-PARAGRAPH. * But bear in mind: once you get there, the GO TO no longer goes to * where it says it goes to. A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. DISPLAY 'Never heard of him.' STOP RUN. SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH. * You think that's bad? You ain't seen nothing. GO TO YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. DISPLAY 'Edsger who now?' GO TO SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH.
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: printf("pos\n"); goto both; negative: printf("neg\n"); both: ...
Rewrite this program in C while keeping its functionality equivalent to the COBOL version.
IDENTIFICATION DIVISION. PROGRAM-ID. JUMPS-PROGRAM. * Nobody writes like this, of course; but... PROCEDURE DIVISION. * You can jump anywhere you like. START-PARAGRAPH. GO TO AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. ALTER START-PARAGRAPH TO PROCEED TO A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. * That's right, folks: we don't just have GO TOs, we have GO TOs whose * destinations can be changed at will, from anywhere in the program, * at run time. GO TO START-PARAGRAPH. * But bear in mind: once you get there, the GO TO no longer goes to * where it says it goes to. A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. DISPLAY 'Never heard of him.' STOP RUN. SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH. * You think that's bad? You ain't seen nothing. GO TO YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. DISPLAY 'Edsger who now?' GO TO SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH.
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: printf("pos\n"); goto both; negative: printf("neg\n"); both: ...
Maintain the same structure and functionality when rewriting this code in C#.
IDENTIFICATION DIVISION. PROGRAM-ID. JUMPS-PROGRAM. * Nobody writes like this, of course; but... PROCEDURE DIVISION. * You can jump anywhere you like. START-PARAGRAPH. GO TO AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. ALTER START-PARAGRAPH TO PROCEED TO A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. * That's right, folks: we don't just have GO TOs, we have GO TOs whose * destinations can be changed at will, from anywhere in the program, * at run time. GO TO START-PARAGRAPH. * But bear in mind: once you get there, the GO TO no longer goes to * where it says it goes to. A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. DISPLAY 'Never heard of him.' STOP RUN. SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH. * You think that's bad? You ain't seen nothing. GO TO YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. DISPLAY 'Edsger who now?' GO TO SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH.
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: Console.WriteLine("pos\n"); goto both; negative: Console.WriteLine("neg\n"); both: ...
Rewrite this program in C# while keeping its functionality equivalent to the COBOL version.
IDENTIFICATION DIVISION. PROGRAM-ID. JUMPS-PROGRAM. * Nobody writes like this, of course; but... PROCEDURE DIVISION. * You can jump anywhere you like. START-PARAGRAPH. GO TO AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. ALTER START-PARAGRAPH TO PROCEED TO A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. * That's right, folks: we don't just have GO TOs, we have GO TOs whose * destinations can be changed at will, from anywhere in the program, * at run time. GO TO START-PARAGRAPH. * But bear in mind: once you get there, the GO TO no longer goes to * where it says it goes to. A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. DISPLAY 'Never heard of him.' STOP RUN. SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH. * You think that's bad? You ain't seen nothing. GO TO YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. DISPLAY 'Edsger who now?' GO TO SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH.
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: Console.WriteLine("pos\n"); goto both; negative: Console.WriteLine("neg\n"); both: ...
Change the programming language of this snippet from COBOL to C++ without modifying what it does.
IDENTIFICATION DIVISION. PROGRAM-ID. JUMPS-PROGRAM. * Nobody writes like this, of course; but... PROCEDURE DIVISION. * You can jump anywhere you like. START-PARAGRAPH. GO TO AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. ALTER START-PARAGRAPH TO PROCEED TO A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. * That's right, folks: we don't just have GO TOs, we have GO TOs whose * destinations can be changed at will, from anywhere in the program, * at run time. GO TO START-PARAGRAPH. * But bear in mind: once you get there, the GO TO no longer goes to * where it says it goes to. A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. DISPLAY 'Never heard of him.' STOP RUN. SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH. * You think that's bad? You ain't seen nothing. GO TO YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. DISPLAY 'Edsger who now?' GO TO SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH.
#include <iostream> #include <utility> using namespace std; int main(void) { cout << "Find a solution to i = 2 * j - 7\n"; pair<int, int> answer; for(int i = 0; true; i++) { for(int j = 0; j < i; j++) { if( i == 2 * j - 7) { answer = make_pair(i, j); goto loopexit; } } } loopexit: cout << answer.first << " = 2 * " << answer.second << " - 7\n\n"; goto spagetti; int k; k = 9; spagetti: cout << "k = " << k << "\n"; }
Translate this program into C++ but keep the logic exactly as in COBOL.
IDENTIFICATION DIVISION. PROGRAM-ID. JUMPS-PROGRAM. * Nobody writes like this, of course; but... PROCEDURE DIVISION. * You can jump anywhere you like. START-PARAGRAPH. GO TO AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. ALTER START-PARAGRAPH TO PROCEED TO A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. * That's right, folks: we don't just have GO TOs, we have GO TOs whose * destinations can be changed at will, from anywhere in the program, * at run time. GO TO START-PARAGRAPH. * But bear in mind: once you get there, the GO TO no longer goes to * where it says it goes to. A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. DISPLAY 'Never heard of him.' STOP RUN. SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH. * You think that's bad? You ain't seen nothing. GO TO YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. DISPLAY 'Edsger who now?' GO TO SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH.
#include <iostream> #include <utility> using namespace std; int main(void) { cout << "Find a solution to i = 2 * j - 7\n"; pair<int, int> answer; for(int i = 0; true; i++) { for(int j = 0; j < i; j++) { if( i == 2 * j - 7) { answer = make_pair(i, j); goto loopexit; } } } loopexit: cout << answer.first << " = 2 * " << answer.second << " - 7\n\n"; goto spagetti; int k; k = 9; spagetti: cout << "k = " << k << "\n"; }
Transform the following COBOL implementation into Java, maintaining the same output and logic.
IDENTIFICATION DIVISION. PROGRAM-ID. JUMPS-PROGRAM. * Nobody writes like this, of course; but... PROCEDURE DIVISION. * You can jump anywhere you like. START-PARAGRAPH. GO TO AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. ALTER START-PARAGRAPH TO PROCEED TO A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. * That's right, folks: we don't just have GO TOs, we have GO TOs whose * destinations can be changed at will, from anywhere in the program, * at run time. GO TO START-PARAGRAPH. * But bear in mind: once you get there, the GO TO no longer goes to * where it says it goes to. A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. DISPLAY 'Never heard of him.' STOP RUN. SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH. * You think that's bad? You ain't seen nothing. GO TO YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. DISPLAY 'Edsger who now?' GO TO SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH.
loop1: while (x != 0) { loop2: for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { loop3: do { if () { continue loop1; } if () { break loop2; } } while (y < 10); } }
Preserve the algorithm and functionality while converting the code from COBOL to Java.
IDENTIFICATION DIVISION. PROGRAM-ID. JUMPS-PROGRAM. * Nobody writes like this, of course; but... PROCEDURE DIVISION. * You can jump anywhere you like. START-PARAGRAPH. GO TO AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. ALTER START-PARAGRAPH TO PROCEED TO A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. * That's right, folks: we don't just have GO TOs, we have GO TOs whose * destinations can be changed at will, from anywhere in the program, * at run time. GO TO START-PARAGRAPH. * But bear in mind: once you get there, the GO TO no longer goes to * where it says it goes to. A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. DISPLAY 'Never heard of him.' STOP RUN. SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH. * You think that's bad? You ain't seen nothing. GO TO YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. DISPLAY 'Edsger who now?' GO TO SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH.
loop1: while (x != 0) { loop2: for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { loop3: do { if () { continue loop1; } if () { break loop2; } } while (y < 10); } }
Change the following COBOL code into Python without altering its purpose.
IDENTIFICATION DIVISION. PROGRAM-ID. JUMPS-PROGRAM. * Nobody writes like this, of course; but... PROCEDURE DIVISION. * You can jump anywhere you like. START-PARAGRAPH. GO TO AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. ALTER START-PARAGRAPH TO PROCEED TO A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. * That's right, folks: we don't just have GO TOs, we have GO TOs whose * destinations can be changed at will, from anywhere in the program, * at run time. GO TO START-PARAGRAPH. * But bear in mind: once you get there, the GO TO no longer goes to * where it says it goes to. A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. DISPLAY 'Never heard of him.' STOP RUN. SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH. * You think that's bad? You ain't seen nothing. GO TO YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. DISPLAY 'Edsger who now?' GO TO SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH.
from goto import goto, label label .start for i in range(1, 4): print i if i == 2: try: output = message except NameError: print "Oops - forgot to define 'message'! Start again." message = "Hello world" goto .start print output, "\n"
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from COBOL to Python, same semantics.
IDENTIFICATION DIVISION. PROGRAM-ID. JUMPS-PROGRAM. * Nobody writes like this, of course; but... PROCEDURE DIVISION. * You can jump anywhere you like. START-PARAGRAPH. GO TO AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. ALTER START-PARAGRAPH TO PROCEED TO A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. * That's right, folks: we don't just have GO TOs, we have GO TOs whose * destinations can be changed at will, from anywhere in the program, * at run time. GO TO START-PARAGRAPH. * But bear in mind: once you get there, the GO TO no longer goes to * where it says it goes to. A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. DISPLAY 'Never heard of him.' STOP RUN. SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH. * You think that's bad? You ain't seen nothing. GO TO YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. DISPLAY 'Edsger who now?' GO TO SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH.
from goto import goto, label label .start for i in range(1, 4): print i if i == 2: try: output = message except NameError: print "Oops - forgot to define 'message'! Start again." message = "Hello world" goto .start print output, "\n"
Convert this COBOL block to VB, preserving its control flow and logic.
IDENTIFICATION DIVISION. PROGRAM-ID. JUMPS-PROGRAM. * Nobody writes like this, of course; but... PROCEDURE DIVISION. * You can jump anywhere you like. START-PARAGRAPH. GO TO AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. ALTER START-PARAGRAPH TO PROCEED TO A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. * That's right, folks: we don't just have GO TOs, we have GO TOs whose * destinations can be changed at will, from anywhere in the program, * at run time. GO TO START-PARAGRAPH. * But bear in mind: once you get there, the GO TO no longer goes to * where it says it goes to. A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. DISPLAY 'Never heard of him.' STOP RUN. SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH. * You think that's bad? You ain't seen nothing. GO TO YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. DISPLAY 'Edsger who now?' GO TO SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH.
Public Sub jump() Debug.Print "VBA only allows" GoTo 1 Debug.Print "no global jumps" 1: Debug.Print "jumps in procedures with GoTo" Debug.Print "However," On 2 GoSub one, two Debug.Print "named in the list after Debug.Print "and execution will continue on the next line" On 1 GoTo one, two Debug.Print "For On Error, see Exceptions" one: Debug.Print "On <n> GoTo let you jump to the n-th label" Debug.Print "and won Exit Sub two: Debug.Print "On <n> GoSub let you jump to the n-th label": Return End Sub
Convert this COBOL block to VB, preserving its control flow and logic.
IDENTIFICATION DIVISION. PROGRAM-ID. JUMPS-PROGRAM. * Nobody writes like this, of course; but... PROCEDURE DIVISION. * You can jump anywhere you like. START-PARAGRAPH. GO TO AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. ALTER START-PARAGRAPH TO PROCEED TO A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. * That's right, folks: we don't just have GO TOs, we have GO TOs whose * destinations can be changed at will, from anywhere in the program, * at run time. GO TO START-PARAGRAPH. * But bear in mind: once you get there, the GO TO no longer goes to * where it says it goes to. A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. DISPLAY 'Never heard of him.' STOP RUN. SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH. * You think that's bad? You ain't seen nothing. GO TO YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. DISPLAY 'Edsger who now?' GO TO SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH.
Public Sub jump() Debug.Print "VBA only allows" GoTo 1 Debug.Print "no global jumps" 1: Debug.Print "jumps in procedures with GoTo" Debug.Print "However," On 2 GoSub one, two Debug.Print "named in the list after Debug.Print "and execution will continue on the next line" On 1 GoTo one, two Debug.Print "For On Error, see Exceptions" one: Debug.Print "On <n> GoTo let you jump to the n-th label" Debug.Print "and won Exit Sub two: Debug.Print "On <n> GoSub let you jump to the n-th label": Return End Sub
Port the provided COBOL code into Go while preserving the original functionality.
IDENTIFICATION DIVISION. PROGRAM-ID. JUMPS-PROGRAM. * Nobody writes like this, of course; but... PROCEDURE DIVISION. * You can jump anywhere you like. START-PARAGRAPH. GO TO AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. ALTER START-PARAGRAPH TO PROCEED TO A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. * That's right, folks: we don't just have GO TOs, we have GO TOs whose * destinations can be changed at will, from anywhere in the program, * at run time. GO TO START-PARAGRAPH. * But bear in mind: once you get there, the GO TO no longer goes to * where it says it goes to. A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. DISPLAY 'Never heard of him.' STOP RUN. SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH. * You think that's bad? You ain't seen nothing. GO TO YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. DISPLAY 'Edsger who now?' GO TO SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH.
package main import "fmt" func main() { outer: for i := 0; i < 4; i++ { for j := 0; j < 4; j++ { if i + j == 4 { continue outer } if i + j == 5 { break outer } fmt.Println(i + j) } } k := 3 if k == 3 { goto later } fmt.Println(k) later: k++ fmt.Println(k) }
Generate an equivalent Go version of this COBOL code.
IDENTIFICATION DIVISION. PROGRAM-ID. JUMPS-PROGRAM. * Nobody writes like this, of course; but... PROCEDURE DIVISION. * You can jump anywhere you like. START-PARAGRAPH. GO TO AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. ALTER START-PARAGRAPH TO PROCEED TO A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. * That's right, folks: we don't just have GO TOs, we have GO TOs whose * destinations can be changed at will, from anywhere in the program, * at run time. GO TO START-PARAGRAPH. * But bear in mind: once you get there, the GO TO no longer goes to * where it says it goes to. A-PARAGRAPH-SOMEWHERE. DISPLAY 'Never heard of him.' STOP RUN. SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH. * You think that's bad? You ain't seen nothing. GO TO YET-ANOTHER-PARAGRAPH. AN-ARBITRARY-PARAGRAPH. DISPLAY 'Edsger who now?' GO TO SOME-OTHER-PARAGRAPH.
package main import "fmt" func main() { outer: for i := 0; i < 4; i++ { for j := 0; j < 4; j++ { if i + j == 4 { continue outer } if i + j == 5 { break outer } fmt.Println(i + j) } } k := 3 if k == 3 { goto later } fmt.Println(k) later: k++ fmt.Println(k) }
Change the following REXX code into C without altering its purpose.
say 'starting...' signal aJump say 'this statement is never executed.' aJump: say 'and here we are at aJump.' do j=1 to 10 say 'j=' j if j==7 then signal bJump end bJump: say 'and here we are at bJump.' signal cJump say 'this statement is never executed.' do k=1 to 10 say 'k=' k cJump: say 'and here we are at cJump.' exit end
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: printf("pos\n"); goto both; negative: printf("neg\n"); both: ...
Change the following REXX code into C without altering its purpose.
say 'starting...' signal aJump say 'this statement is never executed.' aJump: say 'and here we are at aJump.' do j=1 to 10 say 'j=' j if j==7 then signal bJump end bJump: say 'and here we are at bJump.' signal cJump say 'this statement is never executed.' do k=1 to 10 say 'k=' k cJump: say 'and here we are at cJump.' exit end
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: printf("pos\n"); goto both; negative: printf("neg\n"); both: ...
Can you help me rewrite this code in C# instead of REXX, keeping it the same logically?
say 'starting...' signal aJump say 'this statement is never executed.' aJump: say 'and here we are at aJump.' do j=1 to 10 say 'j=' j if j==7 then signal bJump end bJump: say 'and here we are at bJump.' signal cJump say 'this statement is never executed.' do k=1 to 10 say 'k=' k cJump: say 'and here we are at cJump.' exit end
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: Console.WriteLine("pos\n"); goto both; negative: Console.WriteLine("neg\n"); both: ...
Change the following REXX code into C# without altering its purpose.
say 'starting...' signal aJump say 'this statement is never executed.' aJump: say 'and here we are at aJump.' do j=1 to 10 say 'j=' j if j==7 then signal bJump end bJump: say 'and here we are at bJump.' signal cJump say 'this statement is never executed.' do k=1 to 10 say 'k=' k cJump: say 'and here we are at cJump.' exit end
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: Console.WriteLine("pos\n"); goto both; negative: Console.WriteLine("neg\n"); both: ...
Rewrite this program in C++ while keeping its functionality equivalent to the REXX version.
say 'starting...' signal aJump say 'this statement is never executed.' aJump: say 'and here we are at aJump.' do j=1 to 10 say 'j=' j if j==7 then signal bJump end bJump: say 'and here we are at bJump.' signal cJump say 'this statement is never executed.' do k=1 to 10 say 'k=' k cJump: say 'and here we are at cJump.' exit end
#include <iostream> #include <utility> using namespace std; int main(void) { cout << "Find a solution to i = 2 * j - 7\n"; pair<int, int> answer; for(int i = 0; true; i++) { for(int j = 0; j < i; j++) { if( i == 2 * j - 7) { answer = make_pair(i, j); goto loopexit; } } } loopexit: cout << answer.first << " = 2 * " << answer.second << " - 7\n\n"; goto spagetti; int k; k = 9; spagetti: cout << "k = " << k << "\n"; }
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from REXX to C++, same semantics.
say 'starting...' signal aJump say 'this statement is never executed.' aJump: say 'and here we are at aJump.' do j=1 to 10 say 'j=' j if j==7 then signal bJump end bJump: say 'and here we are at bJump.' signal cJump say 'this statement is never executed.' do k=1 to 10 say 'k=' k cJump: say 'and here we are at cJump.' exit end
#include <iostream> #include <utility> using namespace std; int main(void) { cout << "Find a solution to i = 2 * j - 7\n"; pair<int, int> answer; for(int i = 0; true; i++) { for(int j = 0; j < i; j++) { if( i == 2 * j - 7) { answer = make_pair(i, j); goto loopexit; } } } loopexit: cout << answer.first << " = 2 * " << answer.second << " - 7\n\n"; goto spagetti; int k; k = 9; spagetti: cout << "k = " << k << "\n"; }
Rewrite this program in Java while keeping its functionality equivalent to the REXX version.
say 'starting...' signal aJump say 'this statement is never executed.' aJump: say 'and here we are at aJump.' do j=1 to 10 say 'j=' j if j==7 then signal bJump end bJump: say 'and here we are at bJump.' signal cJump say 'this statement is never executed.' do k=1 to 10 say 'k=' k cJump: say 'and here we are at cJump.' exit end
loop1: while (x != 0) { loop2: for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { loop3: do { if () { continue loop1; } if () { break loop2; } } while (y < 10); } }
Maintain the same structure and functionality when rewriting this code in Java.
say 'starting...' signal aJump say 'this statement is never executed.' aJump: say 'and here we are at aJump.' do j=1 to 10 say 'j=' j if j==7 then signal bJump end bJump: say 'and here we are at bJump.' signal cJump say 'this statement is never executed.' do k=1 to 10 say 'k=' k cJump: say 'and here we are at cJump.' exit end
loop1: while (x != 0) { loop2: for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { loop3: do { if () { continue loop1; } if () { break loop2; } } while (y < 10); } }
Rewrite the snippet below in Python so it works the same as the original REXX code.
say 'starting...' signal aJump say 'this statement is never executed.' aJump: say 'and here we are at aJump.' do j=1 to 10 say 'j=' j if j==7 then signal bJump end bJump: say 'and here we are at bJump.' signal cJump say 'this statement is never executed.' do k=1 to 10 say 'k=' k cJump: say 'and here we are at cJump.' exit end
from goto import goto, label label .start for i in range(1, 4): print i if i == 2: try: output = message except NameError: print "Oops - forgot to define 'message'! Start again." message = "Hello world" goto .start print output, "\n"
Port the provided REXX code into Python while preserving the original functionality.
say 'starting...' signal aJump say 'this statement is never executed.' aJump: say 'and here we are at aJump.' do j=1 to 10 say 'j=' j if j==7 then signal bJump end bJump: say 'and here we are at bJump.' signal cJump say 'this statement is never executed.' do k=1 to 10 say 'k=' k cJump: say 'and here we are at cJump.' exit end
from goto import goto, label label .start for i in range(1, 4): print i if i == 2: try: output = message except NameError: print "Oops - forgot to define 'message'! Start again." message = "Hello world" goto .start print output, "\n"
Port the following code from REXX to VB with equivalent syntax and logic.
say 'starting...' signal aJump say 'this statement is never executed.' aJump: say 'and here we are at aJump.' do j=1 to 10 say 'j=' j if j==7 then signal bJump end bJump: say 'and here we are at bJump.' signal cJump say 'this statement is never executed.' do k=1 to 10 say 'k=' k cJump: say 'and here we are at cJump.' exit end
Public Sub jump() Debug.Print "VBA only allows" GoTo 1 Debug.Print "no global jumps" 1: Debug.Print "jumps in procedures with GoTo" Debug.Print "However," On 2 GoSub one, two Debug.Print "named in the list after Debug.Print "and execution will continue on the next line" On 1 GoTo one, two Debug.Print "For On Error, see Exceptions" one: Debug.Print "On <n> GoTo let you jump to the n-th label" Debug.Print "and won Exit Sub two: Debug.Print "On <n> GoSub let you jump to the n-th label": Return End Sub
Translate the given REXX code snippet into VB without altering its behavior.
say 'starting...' signal aJump say 'this statement is never executed.' aJump: say 'and here we are at aJump.' do j=1 to 10 say 'j=' j if j==7 then signal bJump end bJump: say 'and here we are at bJump.' signal cJump say 'this statement is never executed.' do k=1 to 10 say 'k=' k cJump: say 'and here we are at cJump.' exit end
Public Sub jump() Debug.Print "VBA only allows" GoTo 1 Debug.Print "no global jumps" 1: Debug.Print "jumps in procedures with GoTo" Debug.Print "However," On 2 GoSub one, two Debug.Print "named in the list after Debug.Print "and execution will continue on the next line" On 1 GoTo one, two Debug.Print "For On Error, see Exceptions" one: Debug.Print "On <n> GoTo let you jump to the n-th label" Debug.Print "and won Exit Sub two: Debug.Print "On <n> GoSub let you jump to the n-th label": Return End Sub
Transform the following REXX implementation into Go, maintaining the same output and logic.
say 'starting...' signal aJump say 'this statement is never executed.' aJump: say 'and here we are at aJump.' do j=1 to 10 say 'j=' j if j==7 then signal bJump end bJump: say 'and here we are at bJump.' signal cJump say 'this statement is never executed.' do k=1 to 10 say 'k=' k cJump: say 'and here we are at cJump.' exit end
package main import "fmt" func main() { outer: for i := 0; i < 4; i++ { for j := 0; j < 4; j++ { if i + j == 4 { continue outer } if i + j == 5 { break outer } fmt.Println(i + j) } } k := 3 if k == 3 { goto later } fmt.Println(k) later: k++ fmt.Println(k) }
Keep all operations the same but rewrite the snippet in Go.
say 'starting...' signal aJump say 'this statement is never executed.' aJump: say 'and here we are at aJump.' do j=1 to 10 say 'j=' j if j==7 then signal bJump end bJump: say 'and here we are at bJump.' signal cJump say 'this statement is never executed.' do k=1 to 10 say 'k=' k cJump: say 'and here we are at cJump.' exit end
package main import "fmt" func main() { outer: for i := 0; i < 4; i++ { for j := 0; j < 4; j++ { if i + j == 4 { continue outer } if i + j == 5 { break outer } fmt.Println(i + j) } } k := 3 if k == 3 { goto later } fmt.Println(k) later: k++ fmt.Println(k) }
Write the same code in C as shown below in Ruby.
require 'continuation' unless defined? Continuation if a = callcc { |c| [c, 1] } c, i = a c[nil] if i > 100 case 0 when i % 3 print "Fizz" case 0 when i % 5 print "Buzz" end when i % 5 print "Buzz" else print i end puts c[c, i + 1] end
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: printf("pos\n"); goto both; negative: printf("neg\n"); both: ...
Rewrite this program in C while keeping its functionality equivalent to the Ruby version.
require 'continuation' unless defined? Continuation if a = callcc { |c| [c, 1] } c, i = a c[nil] if i > 100 case 0 when i % 3 print "Fizz" case 0 when i % 5 print "Buzz" end when i % 5 print "Buzz" else print i end puts c[c, i + 1] end
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: printf("pos\n"); goto both; negative: printf("neg\n"); both: ...
Generate an equivalent C# version of this Ruby code.
require 'continuation' unless defined? Continuation if a = callcc { |c| [c, 1] } c, i = a c[nil] if i > 100 case 0 when i % 3 print "Fizz" case 0 when i % 5 print "Buzz" end when i % 5 print "Buzz" else print i end puts c[c, i + 1] end
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: Console.WriteLine("pos\n"); goto both; negative: Console.WriteLine("neg\n"); both: ...
Translate the given Ruby code snippet into C# without altering its behavior.
require 'continuation' unless defined? Continuation if a = callcc { |c| [c, 1] } c, i = a c[nil] if i > 100 case 0 when i % 3 print "Fizz" case 0 when i % 5 print "Buzz" end when i % 5 print "Buzz" else print i end puts c[c, i + 1] end
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: Console.WriteLine("pos\n"); goto both; negative: Console.WriteLine("neg\n"); both: ...
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from Ruby to C++, same semantics.
require 'continuation' unless defined? Continuation if a = callcc { |c| [c, 1] } c, i = a c[nil] if i > 100 case 0 when i % 3 print "Fizz" case 0 when i % 5 print "Buzz" end when i % 5 print "Buzz" else print i end puts c[c, i + 1] end
#include <iostream> #include <utility> using namespace std; int main(void) { cout << "Find a solution to i = 2 * j - 7\n"; pair<int, int> answer; for(int i = 0; true; i++) { for(int j = 0; j < i; j++) { if( i == 2 * j - 7) { answer = make_pair(i, j); goto loopexit; } } } loopexit: cout << answer.first << " = 2 * " << answer.second << " - 7\n\n"; goto spagetti; int k; k = 9; spagetti: cout << "k = " << k << "\n"; }
Change the following Ruby code into C++ without altering its purpose.
require 'continuation' unless defined? Continuation if a = callcc { |c| [c, 1] } c, i = a c[nil] if i > 100 case 0 when i % 3 print "Fizz" case 0 when i % 5 print "Buzz" end when i % 5 print "Buzz" else print i end puts c[c, i + 1] end
#include <iostream> #include <utility> using namespace std; int main(void) { cout << "Find a solution to i = 2 * j - 7\n"; pair<int, int> answer; for(int i = 0; true; i++) { for(int j = 0; j < i; j++) { if( i == 2 * j - 7) { answer = make_pair(i, j); goto loopexit; } } } loopexit: cout << answer.first << " = 2 * " << answer.second << " - 7\n\n"; goto spagetti; int k; k = 9; spagetti: cout << "k = " << k << "\n"; }
Translate the given Ruby code snippet into Java without altering its behavior.
require 'continuation' unless defined? Continuation if a = callcc { |c| [c, 1] } c, i = a c[nil] if i > 100 case 0 when i % 3 print "Fizz" case 0 when i % 5 print "Buzz" end when i % 5 print "Buzz" else print i end puts c[c, i + 1] end
loop1: while (x != 0) { loop2: for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { loop3: do { if () { continue loop1; } if () { break loop2; } } while (y < 10); } }
Rewrite this program in Java while keeping its functionality equivalent to the Ruby version.
require 'continuation' unless defined? Continuation if a = callcc { |c| [c, 1] } c, i = a c[nil] if i > 100 case 0 when i % 3 print "Fizz" case 0 when i % 5 print "Buzz" end when i % 5 print "Buzz" else print i end puts c[c, i + 1] end
loop1: while (x != 0) { loop2: for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { loop3: do { if () { continue loop1; } if () { break loop2; } } while (y < 10); } }
Change the programming language of this snippet from Ruby to Python without modifying what it does.
require 'continuation' unless defined? Continuation if a = callcc { |c| [c, 1] } c, i = a c[nil] if i > 100 case 0 when i % 3 print "Fizz" case 0 when i % 5 print "Buzz" end when i % 5 print "Buzz" else print i end puts c[c, i + 1] end
from goto import goto, label label .start for i in range(1, 4): print i if i == 2: try: output = message except NameError: print "Oops - forgot to define 'message'! Start again." message = "Hello world" goto .start print output, "\n"
Produce a functionally identical Python code for the snippet given in Ruby.
require 'continuation' unless defined? Continuation if a = callcc { |c| [c, 1] } c, i = a c[nil] if i > 100 case 0 when i % 3 print "Fizz" case 0 when i % 5 print "Buzz" end when i % 5 print "Buzz" else print i end puts c[c, i + 1] end
from goto import goto, label label .start for i in range(1, 4): print i if i == 2: try: output = message except NameError: print "Oops - forgot to define 'message'! Start again." message = "Hello world" goto .start print output, "\n"
Translate this program into VB but keep the logic exactly as in Ruby.
require 'continuation' unless defined? Continuation if a = callcc { |c| [c, 1] } c, i = a c[nil] if i > 100 case 0 when i % 3 print "Fizz" case 0 when i % 5 print "Buzz" end when i % 5 print "Buzz" else print i end puts c[c, i + 1] end
Public Sub jump() Debug.Print "VBA only allows" GoTo 1 Debug.Print "no global jumps" 1: Debug.Print "jumps in procedures with GoTo" Debug.Print "However," On 2 GoSub one, two Debug.Print "named in the list after Debug.Print "and execution will continue on the next line" On 1 GoTo one, two Debug.Print "For On Error, see Exceptions" one: Debug.Print "On <n> GoTo let you jump to the n-th label" Debug.Print "and won Exit Sub two: Debug.Print "On <n> GoSub let you jump to the n-th label": Return End Sub
Convert this Ruby block to VB, preserving its control flow and logic.
require 'continuation' unless defined? Continuation if a = callcc { |c| [c, 1] } c, i = a c[nil] if i > 100 case 0 when i % 3 print "Fizz" case 0 when i % 5 print "Buzz" end when i % 5 print "Buzz" else print i end puts c[c, i + 1] end
Public Sub jump() Debug.Print "VBA only allows" GoTo 1 Debug.Print "no global jumps" 1: Debug.Print "jumps in procedures with GoTo" Debug.Print "However," On 2 GoSub one, two Debug.Print "named in the list after Debug.Print "and execution will continue on the next line" On 1 GoTo one, two Debug.Print "For On Error, see Exceptions" one: Debug.Print "On <n> GoTo let you jump to the n-th label" Debug.Print "and won Exit Sub two: Debug.Print "On <n> GoSub let you jump to the n-th label": Return End Sub
Change the following Ruby code into Go without altering its purpose.
require 'continuation' unless defined? Continuation if a = callcc { |c| [c, 1] } c, i = a c[nil] if i > 100 case 0 when i % 3 print "Fizz" case 0 when i % 5 print "Buzz" end when i % 5 print "Buzz" else print i end puts c[c, i + 1] end
package main import "fmt" func main() { outer: for i := 0; i < 4; i++ { for j := 0; j < 4; j++ { if i + j == 4 { continue outer } if i + j == 5 { break outer } fmt.Println(i + j) } } k := 3 if k == 3 { goto later } fmt.Println(k) later: k++ fmt.Println(k) }
Keep all operations the same but rewrite the snippet in Go.
require 'continuation' unless defined? Continuation if a = callcc { |c| [c, 1] } c, i = a c[nil] if i > 100 case 0 when i % 3 print "Fizz" case 0 when i % 5 print "Buzz" end when i % 5 print "Buzz" else print i end puts c[c, i + 1] end
package main import "fmt" func main() { outer: for i := 0; i < 4; i++ { for j := 0; j < 4; j++ { if i + j == 4 { continue outer } if i + j == 5 { break outer } fmt.Println(i + j) } } k := 3 if k == 3 { goto later } fmt.Println(k) later: k++ fmt.Println(k) }
Please provide an equivalent version of this Scala code in C.
fun main(args: Array<String>) { intArrayOf(4, 5, 6).forEach lambda@ { if (it == 5) return@lambda println(it) } println() loop@ for (i in 0 .. 3) { for (j in 0 .. 3) { if (i + j == 4) continue@loop if (i + j == 5) break@loop println(i + j) } } }
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: printf("pos\n"); goto both; negative: printf("neg\n"); both: ...
Port the following code from Scala to C with equivalent syntax and logic.
fun main(args: Array<String>) { intArrayOf(4, 5, 6).forEach lambda@ { if (it == 5) return@lambda println(it) } println() loop@ for (i in 0 .. 3) { for (j in 0 .. 3) { if (i + j == 4) continue@loop if (i + j == 5) break@loop println(i + j) } } }
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: printf("pos\n"); goto both; negative: printf("neg\n"); both: ...
Keep all operations the same but rewrite the snippet in C#.
fun main(args: Array<String>) { intArrayOf(4, 5, 6).forEach lambda@ { if (it == 5) return@lambda println(it) } println() loop@ for (i in 0 .. 3) { for (j in 0 .. 3) { if (i + j == 4) continue@loop if (i + j == 5) break@loop println(i + j) } } }
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: Console.WriteLine("pos\n"); goto both; negative: Console.WriteLine("neg\n"); both: ...
Keep all operations the same but rewrite the snippet in C#.
fun main(args: Array<String>) { intArrayOf(4, 5, 6).forEach lambda@ { if (it == 5) return@lambda println(it) } println() loop@ for (i in 0 .. 3) { for (j in 0 .. 3) { if (i + j == 4) continue@loop if (i + j == 5) break@loop println(i + j) } } }
if (x > 0) goto positive; else goto negative; positive: Console.WriteLine("pos\n"); goto both; negative: Console.WriteLine("neg\n"); both: ...
Preserve the algorithm and functionality while converting the code from Scala to C++.
fun main(args: Array<String>) { intArrayOf(4, 5, 6).forEach lambda@ { if (it == 5) return@lambda println(it) } println() loop@ for (i in 0 .. 3) { for (j in 0 .. 3) { if (i + j == 4) continue@loop if (i + j == 5) break@loop println(i + j) } } }
#include <iostream> #include <utility> using namespace std; int main(void) { cout << "Find a solution to i = 2 * j - 7\n"; pair<int, int> answer; for(int i = 0; true; i++) { for(int j = 0; j < i; j++) { if( i == 2 * j - 7) { answer = make_pair(i, j); goto loopexit; } } } loopexit: cout << answer.first << " = 2 * " << answer.second << " - 7\n\n"; goto spagetti; int k; k = 9; spagetti: cout << "k = " << k << "\n"; }
Change the programming language of this snippet from Scala to C++ without modifying what it does.
fun main(args: Array<String>) { intArrayOf(4, 5, 6).forEach lambda@ { if (it == 5) return@lambda println(it) } println() loop@ for (i in 0 .. 3) { for (j in 0 .. 3) { if (i + j == 4) continue@loop if (i + j == 5) break@loop println(i + j) } } }
#include <iostream> #include <utility> using namespace std; int main(void) { cout << "Find a solution to i = 2 * j - 7\n"; pair<int, int> answer; for(int i = 0; true; i++) { for(int j = 0; j < i; j++) { if( i == 2 * j - 7) { answer = make_pair(i, j); goto loopexit; } } } loopexit: cout << answer.first << " = 2 * " << answer.second << " - 7\n\n"; goto spagetti; int k; k = 9; spagetti: cout << "k = " << k << "\n"; }
Port the following code from Scala to Java with equivalent syntax and logic.
fun main(args: Array<String>) { intArrayOf(4, 5, 6).forEach lambda@ { if (it == 5) return@lambda println(it) } println() loop@ for (i in 0 .. 3) { for (j in 0 .. 3) { if (i + j == 4) continue@loop if (i + j == 5) break@loop println(i + j) } } }
loop1: while (x != 0) { loop2: for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { loop3: do { if () { continue loop1; } if () { break loop2; } } while (y < 10); } }
Translate this program into Java but keep the logic exactly as in Scala.
fun main(args: Array<String>) { intArrayOf(4, 5, 6).forEach lambda@ { if (it == 5) return@lambda println(it) } println() loop@ for (i in 0 .. 3) { for (j in 0 .. 3) { if (i + j == 4) continue@loop if (i + j == 5) break@loop println(i + j) } } }
loop1: while (x != 0) { loop2: for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { loop3: do { if () { continue loop1; } if () { break loop2; } } while (y < 10); } }
Translate the given Scala code snippet into Python without altering its behavior.
fun main(args: Array<String>) { intArrayOf(4, 5, 6).forEach lambda@ { if (it == 5) return@lambda println(it) } println() loop@ for (i in 0 .. 3) { for (j in 0 .. 3) { if (i + j == 4) continue@loop if (i + j == 5) break@loop println(i + j) } } }
from goto import goto, label label .start for i in range(1, 4): print i if i == 2: try: output = message except NameError: print "Oops - forgot to define 'message'! Start again." message = "Hello world" goto .start print output, "\n"
Transform the following Scala implementation into Python, maintaining the same output and logic.
fun main(args: Array<String>) { intArrayOf(4, 5, 6).forEach lambda@ { if (it == 5) return@lambda println(it) } println() loop@ for (i in 0 .. 3) { for (j in 0 .. 3) { if (i + j == 4) continue@loop if (i + j == 5) break@loop println(i + j) } } }
from goto import goto, label label .start for i in range(1, 4): print i if i == 2: try: output = message except NameError: print "Oops - forgot to define 'message'! Start again." message = "Hello world" goto .start print output, "\n"
Can you help me rewrite this code in VB instead of Scala, keeping it the same logically?
fun main(args: Array<String>) { intArrayOf(4, 5, 6).forEach lambda@ { if (it == 5) return@lambda println(it) } println() loop@ for (i in 0 .. 3) { for (j in 0 .. 3) { if (i + j == 4) continue@loop if (i + j == 5) break@loop println(i + j) } } }
Public Sub jump() Debug.Print "VBA only allows" GoTo 1 Debug.Print "no global jumps" 1: Debug.Print "jumps in procedures with GoTo" Debug.Print "However," On 2 GoSub one, two Debug.Print "named in the list after Debug.Print "and execution will continue on the next line" On 1 GoTo one, two Debug.Print "For On Error, see Exceptions" one: Debug.Print "On <n> GoTo let you jump to the n-th label" Debug.Print "and won Exit Sub two: Debug.Print "On <n> GoSub let you jump to the n-th label": Return End Sub