OpenEuphoria

Re: The fate of Euphoria

• Posted by "Juergen Luethje" <j.lue at gmx.de> Nov 09, 2004
• 558 views

Derek Parnell wrote:

> Juergen Luethje wrote:
>>
>> Patrick Barnes wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>> Is there anything that can be done with GOTO, that can't be done with
>>> a full set of high-level program flow statements?
>>
>> No, there isn't. Scientists have proved that.
>
> Yes, there is. Execute faster.

Sometimes faster, and sometimes slower:
   http://www.stevemcconnell.com/ccgoto.htm

So this is not a convincing argument.

> My position is this...
>
> A programming language is a tool to help people write and read programs.
> GOTO is useful for some people.
> No one is forcing people to use GOTO if it is present in a language (except
> assembler maybe).

This might be true, or it might not be true.
Thanks that you wrote above: "... and read". So "use" can be writing or
reading.

True is:
No one is forcing people to *write* GOTO if it is present in a language.
What about:
No one is forcing people to *read* GOTO if it is present in a language??

The always repeated argument: "No one is forcing people to use GOTO."
(meaning "No one is forcing people to *write* GOTO.") only takes one
side of the coin into account.

As a layman and autodidact, much that I know about programming comes
from reading source code by other people. I'm not actually "forced" to
read source code by other people, but it is very, very useful for me.
For instance (certainly not only) I am curious about all the programs
that participate in the current programming contest.

I can read and understand code without GOTO much easier, faster, and
more reliable, so why in heaven should I be interested in something,
that greatly increases the probability that code that I want to read is
less readable? I'm not a masochist.

> I would never use GOTO in any of my Euphoria programs.
> I would never deny other people the use of GOTO in a Euphoria program. Even
> though I would find it hard to trust such a program

Me too. And why should there be any reason to encourage writing of
programs that are not trustworthy??

> and I would give it a poor 'style' score 
>
> It sort like the 'free speech' position: I would defend a person's right
> to expression even if I disagreed with that person's expression.

Derek, there are already dozens of languages with a GOTO statement.
There is no need that *every* language should have a GOTO statement, is
it? Diversity in this context means IMHO, that besides all those
languages which contain GOTO, there are also languages that don't
contain it.

> I believe that GOTO always leads to programs which are expensive to
> maintain. However, if that cost is acceptable, then the use of GOTO is
> fine.

The one who writes a program with GOTO, and the one who has to maintain
it, might be different persons. The maintaining person probably was not
asked beforehand, whether s/he considers the cost acceptable.

Also, Euphoria is the most elegant programming language that I've ever
seen. GOTO in Euphoria would look like bird droppings on the face of
Mona Lisa. 

Regards,
   Juergen