OpenEuphoria

Re: The fate of Euphoria

• Posted by Patrick Barnes <mrtrick at gmail.com> Nov 09, 2004
• 549 views

On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 23:50:18 -0600, Kat <gertie at visionsix.com> wrote:
> A goto by any other name, but mine must spec unequivically and exactly
> where it goes to, your continue and next will need to be altered if you add
> significant code. You want a continue, break, next, exit, resume, hop, skip,
> blah, blah, blah, but no goto??!!?? Goto can replace ALL those!

That's why I suggested using labelled loops...

Kat, I'm not campaigning for continued exclusion of the goto
statement... I'm rather ambivalent about whether or not it's in the
language.

However, goto statements are considered 'inelegant' compared to
high-level program flow statements, even though when you get down to
it, they're all "jmp" in assembly code.

Currently with Euphoria as it is (lacking some high-level program flow
statements), there would be coding advantages to having a goto
statement...

However, what my question was (and still wasn't answered):
Is there anything that can be done with GOTO, that can't be done with
a full set of high-level program flow statements?
-- 
MrTrick