From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,4b06f8f15f01a568 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public From: ell@access.digex.net (Ell) Subject: Re: Software landmines (loops) Date: 1998/09/02 Message-ID: <35eeea9b.2174586@news.erols.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 387048973 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <6r9f8h$jtm$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6renh8$ga7$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6rf59b$2ud$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6rfra4$rul$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <35DBDD24.D003404D@calfp.co.uk> <6sbuod$fra$1@hirame.wwa.com> <35f51e53.48044143@ <904556531.666222@miso.it.uq.edu.au> <6sgror$je8$3@news.indigo.ie> <6sh3qn$9p2$1@hirame.wwa.com> <6simjo$jnh$1@hirame.wwa.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com X-Trace: winter.news.erols.com 904720337 28007 207.172.52.33 (2 Sep 1998 07:12:17 GMT) Organization: Universe Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: ell@access.digex.net Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-09-02T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: On Wed, 2 Sep 1998 00:44:08 -0500, "Robert Martin" wrote: >In any case, I note that in this thread nearly every article that advocates >multiple exits evokes either readability, complexity, or naturalness as the >justification. I contend that these are highly subjective things, This may be true, though I don't thinks so, but adherence to the dogma you made up about "single entry and single exit" doesn't make things clearer as most see it in this case. >Finally, I contend that the factors in favor of using a >single-entry/single-exit style are, on the other hand, quite concrete and >demonstrable. It has been shown that adhering to a structured style You have not shown at all that "single entry, single exit" is a general coding maxim of structured programming. And you should be ashamed of yourself for asserting that it is when after recently being challenged on it, you failed to prove that it was a general coding heuristic of structured programming. Why do you think you have a right to lie, and make false assertions contrary ti the facts? >facilitates both resource management and error processing. It has also >been shown that a multiple exit style is vulnerable to redundant code, >code for recovery of state. Not at all. It has been shown that in this and many other cases the difference in state at each exit point matters little. >So, it seems what we have here is "gut feelings" warring against empirical >data. It seems we have a masochistic task master adhering to his own unnecessary dogma trying to make others suffer as well by palming his dogma off as some kind of officialdom. Further, he can't prove it as officialdom and it wouldn't matter if it was because the appropriateness of all heuristics depends on specific concrete circumstances. Elliott