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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ncrlnk!ncrcae!hubcap!gatech!purdue!rjh
From: rjh@cs.purdue.EDU (Bob Hathaway)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada and the infamous goto
Message-ID: <5857@medusa.cs.purdue.edu>
Date: 19 Jan 89 01:48:05 GMT
References: <8901171823.AA20919@bx.sei.cmu.edu> <4125@hubcap.UUCP>
Sender: news@cs.purdue.EDU
Reply-To: rjh@cs.purdue.edu (Bob Hathaway)
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

>
>   Speaking of the non-goto rationale behind Ada, can anyone tell me
>   why Ada has a goto statement??  (See LRM 5.9...)  The Rationale for 
>   the Design of Ada conveniently fails to discuss it.

Modula-2 doesn't have a goto statement and I've never missed it.
I recommend removing the goto in Ada also.   There is no high-order
justification and goto's complicate code generation and optimization.

Bob Hathaway
rjh@purdue.edu