RE: Kat's goto
On 6 Feb 2002, at 13:05, kbochert at ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
>
> I have been following the goto debate with interest. I believe that
> the carefull use of goto is very useful for simplifying code and
> I intend to add it to the Euphoria source.
>
> I originally decided against it because it
> seemed very difficult, but after porting to LCC, adding
> initializations, slicing shorthands, and references, it now
> seems quite straightforward (should be about 2 days work). Using a
> translator to change goto's into structured code would be WAY beyond
> my capabilities.
>
> A sample of the syntax I will be using is:
>
> procedure foo()
> ...
> if ... then
> ...
> goto done
> end if
> ...
> :done:
> end procedure
>
> Surrounding the labels with ':'s helps them stand out.
>
> Labels and goto's will only be allowed in procedures or
> functions.
Perfectly acceptable, but just out of curiosity, why not in the main?
> Dangling goto's and unreferenced labels will be illegal.
What if you put them in --label-- ? Then unreferenced labels will be treated
like comments by default. Either way, as you like, i won't quibble over this
one, since making them illegal also has good points. Dangling gotos are
definitely a programming error tho.
> Forward and backward references will be ok.
>
> Karl Bochert
<giddy smile>
Kat
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
