On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 19:14:18 +0100, Mark Lawrence wrote:

> On 10/06/2014 08:27, Thomas Rachel wrote:
>> Am 08.06.2014 05:58 schrieb Rustom Mody:
>>> Some people┬╣ think that gotos are a code-smell.
>>>  ┬╣ I am not exactly those people.
>>> A chap called E W Dijkstra made the statement: "Goto statement
>>> considered harmful" and became famous.
>> And became widely misunderstood. If anybody would read the whole what
>> he wrote, people would learn that he doesn't criticise the *use* of
>> goto, but he wants the *replacement* of goto with something else (like
>> exceptions).
>> As C doesn't have exceptions, goto is in many cases the simplest and
>> easiest way of handling errors.
>> Essentially, you can write both good and bad code both with and without
>> goto.
>> Thomaas
> I entirely agree.  I find it incredible that some people find it so
> difficult to differentiate having tens or even hundreds of gotos leaping
> around willy nilly to a similar number of labels, and a similar number
> of gotos targetted at one label called SNAFU or whatever.

once the compiler gets hold of it all the CPU has to work with are goto 
variants, jump if equal etc.(I don't know the actual x86 assembler but it 
is the same on all processors)
(It is an old Debian tradition to leave at least twice a year ...)
        -- Sven Rudolph

Reply via email to