RE: Kat's goto
Jiri Babor wrote:
> Rod,
>
> I have always enjoyed your contributions and would hate to see you in
> the ever increasing camp of my enemies,
Well, thanks, I try. 
(Not wanting a GOTO would make me an enemy?)
> but I find your last couple of
> intolerant notes really disturbing.
They're not meant to be, but I can see how they can come across as
something similar to 'intolerant'. But I didn't want to chase rabbits
about performance issues, etc., I wanted to get to what was for me the
heart of the issue.
> >I... DO NOT... get this! Is it really so hard to see what's cropping
> >up here? > >First pass-by-reference, now GOTO, in a matter of days.
>
> Would you prefer to allow us just one request for enhancement per
> person every couple of years?
Actually, a slowdown would probably be a good thing. At the above rate,
by year's end Euphoria will be unrecognizable. Yes, I know people have
the right to ask for them--I'm not asking for a censorship of such ideas
on the list--but then I have the right to express frustration with their
requests, yes? Particularly when it seems like the issue is pretty much
settled... Rob doesn't want GOTO, and someone else has already coded it
themselves. Seems like a fine solution.
>And, ignoring often quoted
> semi-religious academic arguments, what's wrong with
> 'pass-by-reference'? It's a very useful tool that would allow us to
> do, very efficiently, what we simply cannot do now. The same goes for
> the 'goto'. The safety aspects? Well, we do not ban cars because
> idiots keep killing us and themselves with them...
I'm not really against them because they're that unsafe--although I do
think GOTO is rather ugly. I'm against it because they seem to strike at
some core principles of the language, principles that drew me to it
(more on that below.) Plus I still don't see how they allow anything
that's impossible without them now.
<snip>
> >If you can't add it yourself (via source code or writing a library),
> >why not just use a language that has what you need, if the need is so
> >great?
>
> Everybody potentially benefits from reasonable enhancements, they
> improve the expressive power of the language, they give us more
> freedom to say whatever we have to say in better ways. It's called
> progress.
Mmm, yes, I understand THAT part of it... but some 'enhancements' can
cause more trouble than they'll give benefit, and can actually hinder
the expressive power of the language (IMO, yes.) I wouldn't call a GOTO
progress in that regard.
> >If it's not that necessary, why change the essense of the language
> >(which a GOTO would *definitely* do) for everyone else by requesting
> >the needed element be affixed to it???
>
> What's the essence of the language that a 'goto' would so irreparably
> damage? It looks you were talking some sort of metaphysics there that's
> way beyond me...
Okay, consider. Euphoria:
-- has no direct forward references (just an explicit work-around)
-- has only two loop constructs (only had 1 for a while)
-- forces structure upon programmers
-- has a syntax and style that is rather elegant
If someone came to me and said that some language existed with those
qualities, and asked if I thought it had a GOTO in it, I'd probably
answer, "No, I don't think so, but if it does it's probably only usable
in an extremely restricted fashion. An unhindered GOTO wouldn't seem to
fit the rest of that design." *That's* part of my point. It seems
apparent to me that the language isn't designed with the kind of mindset
that would put in a GOTO (that wasn't an attack, just an observation.)
I'm used to thinking about it in its current fashion, which seems very
consistent.
The thought of downloading a neat new library and finding GOTOs strewn
everywhere makes me uneasy, considering what I'm used to finding when I
look at Euphoria code, and considering that GOTOs just aren't necessary.
(I know, I know, structured code can be unwieldy too, but I deal with
that better, and since Eu already allows that, I don't see how adding
GOTO to the mix will do anything but make that situation worse.)
Maybe I need to spend more time being on the 'ground level' of a new
language, but right now the prospect of asking for a change like a GOTO
in the language just seems so out-of-place. Like walking into a
fine-dining Japanese restaurant and asking--not that they cook a batch
just for you--but rather that they put 'chitlins' *on the menu*. It
strikes me as just as bizarre.
Rod Jackson
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
