Re: Is there an ADA analogue to the C++ continue statement?

[Richard D Riehle <laoXhai@ix.netcom.com>]

We should probably change the name of the topic to:

        "Go To Considered Harmful"

reflecting the origins of this notion in the 1968 letter by
E. Dijkstra to the Communications of the ACM.   

No experienced software practitioner, using any language, would
design software so it required a "goto."  During the design phase
of a project we all try to abide by accepted practices that have
proven effective in building reliable software.  However, during 
the implementation phase, when we are actually trying to lay down
clear, maintainable, and efficient code, we sometimes find it 
appropriate to make use of some construct that might horrify the
standards people.  

I can recall only one project where it was appropriate to use a 
"goto" and we required the programmer to justify its use in a meeting 
of his fellow team members, most of whom were congenitally hostile 
to even the thought of a "goto."  He did justify its use, and we agreed 
to let it go (to).

Unfortunately, the people who make up rules for programming are
all too often people who no longer write programs.  Sometimes they
are even people who never have written programs.  I am a firm believer
in coding standards.  I would like to think I also believe in 
common sense.  Sometimes inviolate rules are more the cause of 
problems than the solution.  

Someone one once said that "The last act of a dying organization
was to enlarge the rule book."   Perhaps we should consider carefully
before we legislate ourselves into untenable circumstances.

Richard Riehle
AdaWorks Software Engineering