Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!ukc!cam-cl!nmm
From: nmm@cl.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Assigned GOTO
Message-ID: <237@gannet.cl.cam.ac.uk>
Date: 4 Jul 88 12:12:53 GMT
References: <2742@utastro.UUCP> <20008@beta.UUCP> <224@raunvis.UUCP> <1544@microsoft.UUCP> <12215@mimsy.UUCP>
Sender: news@cl.cam.ac.uk
Reply-To: nmm@cl.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren)
Organization: U of Cambridge Comp Lab, UK
Lines: 20


In article 766, chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) writes:
> I am confident that I could convert any assigned GOTO FORTRAN code into 
> something more reasonable, but I am curious: what do people actually 
> use it for?  ...

In general, I agree, but there are a few algorithms where assigned GOTOs
clarify the code (sic).  The ones I have written were all simple finite
state algorithms (e.g. contour plotting), where the next state to go to
was a function of the previous state.  That is, state n+1 is decided by
state n-1, rather than state n.

The 'structured' approach is a case statement inside an infinite loop;
I find this rather less clear.  Still, I would not preserve assigned GOTOs
for the sake of a few unusual algorithms, and no longer use them myself
(even in Fortran).

Nick Maclaren
University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory
nmm@uk.ac.cam.cl