I added a comment to that thread, which I didn't have time to address at the time...and you may be correct that "also if" is necessary to convert M15 docs, but then I must correct MP's conversion. My real example follows the logic of the 2nd example in that other thread. I didn't intend an "also if", M15 didn't interpret it as "also if", and I see no reason for converting it as "also if". It may well be that my programming style and conventions don't match the majority of Mathcad users, and those users need "also if". I think that "also if" and "else if" are sloppy conventions and encourage sloppy programming. I also think that multiple exit points from a routine are sloppy, but I am perhaps out of fashion there, too. In fact, I have a sort of nagging feeling that the "single entry and exit" may have derived from the prolific use of GOTO and all the horror that I have seen that create. So...while I can see the possibility of multiple returns actually cleaning up code, most of the programs where I have seen them used /also/ were very poor examples of good programming. The goal is that program flow should be as clear as possible, so I don't want to adhere to a style for the style's sake if it sacrifices clarity. OTOH, the programming in the other thread http://communities.ptc.com/message/197571#197571 is not a clear one to me, so I simply applied my best guess as to the intent and threw together some examples The OP says what is WRONG but not what is EXPECTED. I don't think that the "also if" that I got after conversion is either clearer to me or yields results that I might expect from reading the code. I looked up "also if" and "programming" in MP Help, and got nothing...dunno what keywords to use.
