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