Re: Good Use of GOTO
c.k.lester wrote:
>
> Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
> > c.k.lester wrote:
> > > It has never been demonstrated that a Euphoria developer needs the
> > > ability.
> > CK, did you actually read any of the links I gave in a previous post?
>
> Yes I did. None of them were convincing arguments for adding GOTO to Euphoria.
Perhaps you could cite the arguments (at least the ones you feel the most
pertaint) and give your counter-responses.
> > > If you can't, then GOTO should not be added because it's just useless
> > > bloat
> > > and at least won't be around to trip programmers up.
> > Trip programmers up? Seriously, I'm kind of getting tired of playing this
> > game.
> > I've said a million times (not 1,000) that programmers can abuse if, while,
> > for, functions, procedures, includes, etc...
>
> I kinda disagree. I think GOTO is easier to abuse. It's unstructured. You can
> use it to go anywhere from anywhere. The if/while/for/etc. is far more
> structured and you are limited to what kind of damage you can do accidentally.
We keep hearing this, yet when CChris asked for modern examples of spagetthi
code abuse from languages which do support goto (such as C), he got nothing.
The burden of proof is now on you to show that this is the case....
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
