On 2008-05-12 06:13, Carl Barron wrote:
> In article <68ohanF2tmpulU1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Bo Persson
> <bop@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>> MiB wrote:
>> >
>> > In limited situations, goto statements can improve readability, make
>> > more compact or more performant code, e.g. when exiting nested loops
>> > (I'd do that with an exception, though). I leave this kind of
>> > optimization to swashbuckler developers with 20 yrs+ experience
>> > (they know when "evil" is "good") and never teach it to beginners
>> > (will produce unusable code predictably).
>> >
>>
>> It's not only that you might need 20 years experience to make the
>> judgment call, it probably also takes at least 20 years to find the
>> one place where a goto is the best solution.
>>
>> It's that rare!
>>
> off the cuff code generated by programs, and code translating code
> from a different language [****ting] come to mind and don't require 20
> years to figure out the best way to initially ****t working 'spagetti'
> code is to start with a working 'spagetti' version that emulates the
> original language,
You could also argue that it is the worst way to ****t spaghetti-code,
since the probability of anyone ever untangling it is significantly
smaller if the code works. :-)
--
Erik Wikström
[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm
for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]
|
