Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rutgers!mtune!codas!cpsc6a!rtech!wrs!dg
From: dg@wrs.UUCP (David Goodenough)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: goto's in C: an opinion...
Message-ID: <264@wrs.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 22-Jul-87 14:05:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: wrs.264
Posted: Wed Jul 22 14:05:50 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 25-Jul-87 05:40:02 EDT
References: <3289@bigburd.PRC.Unisys.COM> <7571@beta.UUCP> <765@haddock.ISC.COM>
Reply-To: dg@wrs.UUCP (David Goodenough)
Organization: Wind River Systems, Emeryville, CA
Lines: 23
Summary: Remember Hal Hickman

In article <765@haddock.ISC.COM> karl@haddock.ISC.COM (Karl Heuer) writes:
>In article <7571@beta.UUCP> hwe@beta.UUCP (Skip Egdorf) writes:
>>In any language that supports a complete set of structured constructs,
>>there is NO NEED for a goto, and the statement should be removed from
>>the language!
>
>The statement is true with the qualifier.  However, I do not know any language
>that supports what I would consider a "complete set" of structured constructs.
>Perhaps ADA does, but I'm not sure I want to use something that big.

Now it's my turn to play devil's advocate - I seem to remember that in
some obscure journal or other, one of those structured programming gurus
(i.e. Djykstra (sp??) / Wirth) said that the only structured concepts
needed are loops and ifs, everything else is just icing. Now looking at
every language so far designed, I see some form of loop and some form
of if. So what are we (myself included) all bitching about??????????
--
		dg@wrs.UUCP - David Goodenough

					+---+
					| +-+-+
					+-+-+ |
					  +---+