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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,8002154d2966e1a1 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-11-07 06:58:49 PST Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.ems.psu.edu!news.litech.org!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!newshosting.com!news-xfer1.atl.newshosting.com!uunet!dca.uu.net!ash.uu.net!world!news From: Robert A Duff Subject: Re: Local vs global variables in ADA User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 Sender: news@world.std.com (Mr Usenet Himself) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 14:58:00 GMT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii References: <5Ldx9.3695$151.38236@weber.videotron.net> <27331d9e.0211060640.6cb14b24@posting.google.com> <0tbcqa.nk3.ln@beastie.ix.netcom.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:30530 Date: 2002-11-07T14:58:00+00:00 List-Id: Dennis Lee Bieber writes: > As it is, I only used "goto" in constructs where the destination was > before the goto (as anyone reading the code should have seen the target > already, and not have to search). ... Hmm. I have always believed just the opposite: that gotos that jump forward (and outward) are easier to understand that gotos that jump backward (and therefore form a loop). For example, I did a lot of Pascal programming a long time ago, and I don't think I *ever* wrote a backward-jumping goto. But I wrote quite a few loop-exiting gotos (since Pascal doesn't have Ada's "exit" or "return"). And quite a few "while True do...", since Pascal doesn't have Ada's plain "loop". - Bob