forum-msg-id-135465-edit

Original date:2021-01-12 20:42:02 Edited by: petelomax Subject: Re: wikipedia draft

OK, I concede. No idea on timescales though.

Full disclosure: I have always been quite strongly opposed to adding goto, and more recently the lack of said in JavaScript somewhat strengthened that opposition, since it might interfere with my plans for a JavaScript transpiler. But it would never ever in a bazillion years have supported #ilASM{} anyway. So yes, sometimes I spout nonsense.

katsmeow said...

The Phix help file does a great job of hiding the feature you don't want anyone to use

Fair point, in that there was no proper mention of goto or the #ilASM replacement anywhere at all in the manual. Not everyone has read pops.e (see line 1117), I guess...
I also searched for and re-read a few arguments that goto is fine as long as it's all forward-only (or all backward-only), which helped change my mind, so the new manual entry will recommend that.

katsmeow said...

and it's top-level only, and cannot be used within procedures or functions

Actually not true at all, the only thing is label scopes don't overlap, as in cross top-level/routine boundaries, since the callstack would inevitably and instantly and irretrievably be fubar.
(Although, actually, you can jump to a global label from within a routine, at your own risk.)

katsmeow said...

how much trouble the coder can get into using the case statement, which wouldn't happen if goto was available.

That was in fact a pretty good winning point.

Not Categorized, Please Help

Search



Quick Links

User menu

Not signed in.

Misc Menu