<code>vet</code>code> no longer reports references to
  loop variables from within a function literal that
  might outlive the iteration of the loop.
  In Go 1.22, loop variables are created anew for each iteration,
  so such references are no longer at risk of using a variable
  after it has been updated by the loop.
</p>

<h4 id="vet-appends">New warnings for missing values after append</h4>

</p>

<p>
Not introducing data races also means not assuming that loops terminate.
For example, a compiler must in general not move the accesses to <code>*p</code> or <code>*q</code>
ahead of the loop in this program:
</p>

<pre>
n := 0
for e := list; e != nil; e = e.next {
	n++
}
i := *p
*q = 1
</pre>

<p>

		}
	}
</pre>

<h3 id="Continue_statements">Continue statements</h3>

<p>
A "continue" statement begins the next iteration of the
innermost <a href="#For_statements">"for" loop</a> at its post statement.
The "for" loop must be within the same function.
</p>

<pre class="ebnf">
ContinueStmt = "continue" [ Label ] .
</pre>

<p>
If there is a label, it must be that of an enclosing

</p>

<p>
The assembler program is a way to parse a description of that
semi-abstract instruction set and turn it into instructions to be
input to the linker.
If you want to see what the instructions look like in assembly for a given architecture, say amd64, there
are many examples in the sources of the standard library, in packages such as
<a href="/pkg/runtime/"><code>runtime</code></a> and

</pre>

<h3 id="Continue_statements">Continue statements</h3>

<p>
A "continue" statement begins the next iteration of the
innermost enclosing <a href="#For_statements">"for" loop</a>
by advancing control to the end of the loop block.
The "for" loop must be within the same function.
</p>

<pre class="ebnf">
ContinueStmt = "continue" [ Label ] .
</pre>

<p>