Subject: Re: [stella] OT: Programming, CS theory From: Greg Miller <gmiller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2001 02:21:49 -0500 |
Ah the eternal struggle between GOTO-ers and non-GOTO-ers. :) Personally, I fall into the latter faction. :)
Reason being, I'm pretty sure it's been proven mathematically (by the computer scientist Edsger Dijkstra maybe...?) that any piece of code using a GOTO statement can always be replaced by a non-GOTO alternative, as long as you have some looping construct available. Every imperative language I know
of (excluding assembly language, of course) has at least one looping construct, so why ever use GOTO? It
just makes the code harder to read...and maintain,
-- http://www.classic-games.com/ http://www.indie-games.com/ There is no peaceful solution to organized terrorist networks.
- Archives (includes files) at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/archives/ Unsub & more at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
[stella] Re: Programming Contest?, Andrew Wallace | Thread | Re: [stella] OT: Programming, CS th, Julian Squires |
Re: [stella] Programming Contest?, Chris Wilkson | Date | [stella] Re: Programming Contest?, Andrew Wallace |
Month |