Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!hao!seismo!brl-tgr!tgr!MLY.G.SHADES%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
From: MLY.G.SHADES%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: using break instead of goto
Message-ID: <7330@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 14-Jan-85 20:00:00 EST
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.7330
Posted: Mon Jan 14 20:00:00 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 21-Jan-85 03:37:57 EST
Sender: news@brl-tgr.ARPA
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab
Lines: 15
when you but in that form (new design methodology) i tend to
agree. proving correctness would be nice but we still end up with the
problem of providing possibly deleterious additions to an existing
language (break ).
the c compiler that i use at home is decus c on a small(!!) 11
and at work it is the honeywell mod400/dps 6 c compiler basically
derived from unix's, i also use the pcc compiler for tops-20 here at
oz. all of them are excessively slow and in the case of my home
machine limited in symbol table size. anything that degrades
performance in this case without being a significant improvment to the
language as a whole would be fiercely resented.
sorry about the incomplete previous message i sent that
accidentally but since the discussion has passed on i will not finish it.