Option to Show/Hide the Iteration and Count Terminals on For Loop

[JackDunaway]

I often make small For Loops using Auto-Indexing, and only occasionally do I use either the Iteration Terminal or Count Terminal. My current practice is to tuck the Iteration Terminal under the Count Terminal just to get it out of the way, shown below. I propose that these two terminals can be shown or hidden (circled in green), just like the Conditional Terminal.

Here's an example of the new lower-profile For Loop with the unnecessary terminals hidden:

[elset191]

I do the same thing.  A lot.  Nice suggestion

[JackDunaway]

Here's another example of an even smaller loop. The visual "noise" is reduced, yet you are still able to clearly identify the structure as a For Loop.

[Manzolli]

Great idea! Following the idea, the Iteration Terminal can be also optional in the While Loop structure.

[muks]

True and good idea. But i will still strongly recommend to keep the "N" as default.

[Manzolli]

I suggest that all the hiding should be options to the default mode, which should have all items shown.

[RandyP]

I think the conditional terminal should remain disabled by default. Not only is this "backwards-compatible", but also sticks with the traditional idea of a for loop. A traditional for loop is meant to run through all its iterations, whereas a traditional while loop is meant to stop on a condition. To have a conditional terminal in a for loop, in my opinion, creates a sortof hybird for/while loop, which is not what people want most of the time.

[Manzolli]

Agree with RandyP! I forgot (never used) the new Conditional Terminal option for the For Loop. Let's say generically that the default should be the traditional way, some terminals can be removed or added optionally.

[JackDunaway]

Just to clarify the last four comments: the Count Terminal defaults to shown, the Iteration Terminal defaults to shown, and the Conditional Terminal defaults to hidden (the current behavior of a For Loop). In the original post I should have mentioned that I also envision these defaults: I would not want the Naked For Loop as default!

[muks]

grt than bring it on....

[CrystalTech]

Great Idea, Jack.  So many times the iteration terminal and/or count terminal is just in the way.