Re: GOTO - A fresh perspective?
Well said.
-------
Derek
----- Original Message -----
From: <doc at edgetap.net>
To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
Subject: GOTO - A fresh perspective?
>
> Hi all,
>
> I will try and keep this short although I feel like writing volumes!
> First a short history: early last year I came across Euphoria and was
> (almost) gobsmacked at the flexibilty it seemed to offer. So I
> downloaded and set to work writing an test program for doing OpenGL
> graphics. Within days I had networking and had two machines with
> synchronised displays. The exercise showed me that Euphoria was very
> capable but, given the effort needed to "hook-in" dll's and to work
> around somethings I had come to take for granted in most languages, I
> decided to shelf Euphoria for the time being. I have kept up with the
> news in the interim though and last week thought it was nearly time to
> revisit Euphoria with the 2.3 release.
>
> Back to the present and to get reacquainted I subscibed to Topica only
> to get bombarded with emails arguing for/against "Goto". First, I would
> like to say that my general impression of everyone using this forum is
> that you are all pretty intelligent, thoughtful and considerate, if not
> agreeable, in your replies. However, this makes it all the more
> difficult for me to figure why you seem to be adopting language-centric
> arguments in your debate rather than accepting that if a feature helps
> someone do something easier then it is intrinsically "good" for them, if
> not for you personally. From this it is obvious that I consider a
> programming language as nothing more than a tool and that the programmer
> is THE most important factor in the overall equation. I am well aware of
> the main argument against the use of Goto regarding bad design but I
> would say that if a program is going to be badly designed then GoTo will
> make little if any difference. On the plus side if it allows the
> programmer to get where they are going quicker and be in the position to
> sit back, appreciate their results, THEN to ponder and reassess their
> code design, then that programmer will become a better programmer more
> quickly than the one still struggling to overcome the (possibly
> misconceived) limitations of the language. FYI I totally agree the
> liberal use of GoTo is indicative of lazy design... and I use it
> liberally while testing my *well-designed* code then remove them all
> when finalising the design. Bluntly, it is the programmer who is
> important not the language, and it is the programmer who should be given
> the choice and the decision should not be made for him/her by other
> people who have no use for a feature.
>
> And my final point (phew!): With the 2.3 release I was on the verge of
> buying Euphoria but, and please correct me if I am wrong, did someone
> from RapidEuphoria say "not for a million bucks!"? This does not suggest
> a very customer oriented approach and smacks of an almost elitist
> "ownership" type mentality. This may explain why in the year since I
> first looked at Euphoria much of it's potential is still untapped and
> apparently ignored by the programming community as a whole. I may still
> buy it but my decision will definately be influenced by replies to this
> post. RapidEuphoria giving Kat, at least, the choice to use GoTo without
> going through hoops will of course make the decision a no-brainer 
>
> PS: Where have all the developers with big plans, eg, X/OpenGL-wrappers,
> gone? Seriously, no one planning DirectX 7/8 wrappers?
>
>
>
>
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
