Re: New keyword added: continue
Derek Parnell wrote:
>
> Kat wrote:
> >>> Why are these two blocks so different that
> >>> you call the 2nd one "dangerous"
>
>
> > I do not know why you'd do that code anyhow.
>
> That is not the point, Kat. I know that you and all the other responsible
> coders
> would not write such code. But if 'goto' exists then it it possible for
> SOMEONE
> to write such code. And because of that possibility, the code maintainer has
> to check EVERY BLOODY time what the actual control flow is just in case some
> dunderhead wrote something this bad.
>
Yeah, some coder did it wrong on the internet...
Code which is hard to maintain won't be maintained and will quietly die, like
many goto-less contribs in the Archive. Why should we care?
> > Likewise, i could code up 100 procedures or functions, calling
> > every one of them thru oddball routine_id() names, and cause
> > everyone fits trying to trace them.
>
> That is true. That is why the usage of each routine_id() needs to be justified
> too. However, because of the forward referencing restriction in Euphoria,
> routine_id()
> must be used in some cases because there is no alternative (apart from code
> duplication).
>
> > And strangely, isn't that
> > :next target where someone(?) wants to put an "entry" keyword? OUCH!!
>
> Also true. I've gone off the 'entry' keyword now for that reason and others.
>
> > Do you want me to say you shouldn't code like that?
> > Granted. Do you want me to say someone could code like that? Granted.
> > Are you asking me if i think that is good code? No.
> > Would i code like that? No.
>
> However, that is not the point, Kat. This is not about you. It is about that
> "someone" who could code like this.
>
> > I cannot write up every possible piece of code that
> > could possibly contain a "goto" for your support.
>
> Then don't. No one is forcing you too. However, if anyone wants me,
> specifically,
> to support their code that happens to use a 'goto', then they need to convince
> me that there is no better way but to use 'goto'.
>
> > i am still in favor of goto being added to Eu.
>
> I have no issue with goto being added to Euphoria. I have issues with me
> having
> to support code (Euphoria or otherwise) that uses goto.
>
We may agree that the standard library, nor the interpreter, shoud not have goto
(the C code in backend and translated code has them galore). If you supervise
coders, you may ask them not to use it, since you are the boss. Any remaining
concern?
CChris
> --
> Derek Parnell
> Melbourne, Australia
> Skype name: derek.j.parnell
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
