OpenEuphoria

Re: The fate of Euphoria

• Posted by "Kat" <gertie at visionsix.com> Nov 10, 2004
• 528 views

On 9 Nov 2004, at 21:41, Juergen Luethje wrote:

<SNIP>

> > 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.

How is this difficult to maintain:

procedure whatever(sequence blah)
if blah then goto cleanup end if

:cleanup --<< note it also makes a nice comment
<eucode to release memory>
end procedure
 
Boy oh boy, doesn't that little block of code look like it needs an army of 
programmers to maintain it 24-7?!?

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.

Goddess, i hope i didn't scare you with the preceeding code example then! Is it bird droppings or a wider scope of language that scares you so badly? Just like bird droppings don't belong on the Mona Lisa (but they can go into the compost heap), goto is not meant to replace the if-elsif stack or case or while or anything else. It has it's proper use. I intend to use it properly. Why do you cite people how do not know me who say i will clutter up my code and make it unreadable to you?

Wasn't Mona Lisa a self protrait of da Vinci in drag?

Kat }}}