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=2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,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: 103376,14f7200925acb579
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Roger@natron.demon.co.uk (Roger Barnett)
Subject: Re: No Go To's Forever!
Date: 2000/03/22
Message-ID: <399110395wnr@natron.demon.co.uk>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 600818598
X-Mail2News-Path: 
 news.demon.net!tele-post-20.mail.demon.net!natron.demon.co.uk
References: <38D7B41D.B3494C6A@lmco.com> <8b8m2e$8201@news.cis.okstate.edu>
 <8b9fk3$l18$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
X-Trace: mail2news.demon.co.uk 953726557 mail2news:9004 mail2news
 mail2news.demon.co.uk
Organization: Real Objects Ltd
Reply-To: Roger@natron.demon.co.uk
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net
Date: 2000-03-22T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article: <8b9fk3$l18$1@nnrp1.deja.com>  Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com> 
writes:
> 
> Another big bunch are continue gotos. Ada lacks a continue
> statement, and thus this facility must be simulated with a goto
> as in
> 
>    loop
> 
>     if ... then goto Continue;
> 
>    <<Continue>> null;
>    end loop;
> 
> This is actually quite a structured use of goto


I would argue that this use is clearer than the continue statement
as provided by C.

But then I've been known to suggest compulsory use of labels when
using exit in nested loops.

Like the original poster to this thread, these and other prejudices
come from cruel and unnatural software maintenance.

-- 
Roger Barnett

Interbroker is a registered trademark.