Re: Use of 'goto'

["Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <nospam@gsg.eds.com>]

Nick Roberts wrote:
> 
>  Theoretically, use of the goto can always be replaced
> by other things (this has been proved), but in practice - hah hah!

Actually, that's not true. You're thinking of the article by Bohm (sp?)
and Jacopini, but what they proved was subtly different and not as
strong.

> It's never actually happened to me, interestingly, but if I were to join a
> project and someone were to say "don't use that goto", I would ask them
> why, knowing they could not answer.

If it was me, you'd be wrong. I've told that to students, but only when
I saw a cleaner way (I've seen situations where GOTOs were legitimately
used, but rarely in student code.)

> If they still insisted, I would quit,
> and that is rare thing for me to do. Code bigots come right down on the
> list of the things that crawl upon their belly. Ignorant code bigots come
> bottom.

Ignorant OS bigots. Ignorant editor bigots.

> Is this a dangerous topic, or what?

No, it's a lot safer than "My editor can beat up your editor". Even that
is safer than "My shell can bash <g> in your shell."

> Nick ;-)

-- 

                        Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
                        Senior Software SE

The values in from and reply-to are for the benefit of spammers:
reply to domain eds.com, user msustys1.smetz or to domain gsg.eds.com,
user smetz.