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: f43e6,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,4b06f8f15f01a568 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public From: ell@access.digex.net (Ell) Subject: Re: Which wastes more time? (Was Re: Software landmines (loops)) Date: 1998/09/04 Message-ID: <35f2bd98.40599408@news.erols.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 387793719 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <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$1@hirame.wwa.com> <6sebjr$b69$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6sff74$q0s@gurney.reilly.home> <6sh2j5$jnl$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <35EC2E5A.16DB6CB1@bigfoot-.com> <6sjc0a$1lk$3@news.indigo.ie> <35EFB09E.15412933@s054.aone.net.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com X-Trace: winter.news.erols.com 904904351 10357 207.172.119.177 (4 Sep 1998 10:19:11 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: 1998-09-04T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Loryn Jenkins wrote: >Jerry van Dijk wrote: >> >> Gerry Quinn (gerryq@indigo.ie) wrote: >> >> : In article <35EC2E5A.16DB6CB1@bigfoot-.com>, rhuffman@bigfoot-.com wrote: >> : >Which wastes more time: >> : > >> : >1. Coding loops with a single entry/exit point? >> : >2. Maintaining code with middle exit loops? >> : >3. Religious wars about how to code looops? >> : > >> >> : Ah, but which is more fun? >> >> Religious wars on the use of GOTO ? > >Actually, I have found this one of the most educational threads around. >(Discounting those tiresome contributions from certain regularly >combatorial participants.) And amongst those especially the ones who are most effective in exposing the purely fictitious basis of the arguments held by their opposition. Eh? :-} Elliott