Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cica!iuvax!rutgers!att!cbnewsh!ijk From: ijk@cbnewsh.ATT.COM (ihor.j.kinal) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: The final word on GOTO (Don't I wis Summary: Software Maintenance Message-ID: <4208@cbnewsh.ATT.COM> Date: 25 Sep 89 21:58:20 GMT References: <20324@<1989Sep14> <225800222@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 20 In article <225800222@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu>, mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu writes: > > I would consider a goto harmful IF and ONLY IF it produced a > bug in a program. > Well, what if it took the NEXT poor programmer who maintains that program an extra week to understand what it does ??? Or even an extra minute ??? [each and every time it was examined - it might add up to a lot]. Suppose that the goto was bug-free, but increased the chance of bugs in subsequent fixes/ changes to the program?? Even if the bugs never actually occur? I think we forget that in the software world, MOST of the effort goes in maintaining code that was written by someone else. Ihor Kinal