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