Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Joy of this, Joy of that
Date: 21 Nov 2024 19:48:37 GMT
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <lq9h4kF2tegU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <vhigot$1uakf$1@dont-email.me>
	<6iKdnTQOKNh6AqD6nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@earthlink.com>
	<20241120081039.00006d2a@gmail.com> <vhlium$93kn$1@dont-email.me>
	<vhmprp$iaf1$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net jldoPBOsbxo5LHfUVOFDeQdK9FNy3lhZf49M9zMOcyW4hzaBJt
Cancel-Lock: sha1:hDJr9Z4f0dgLKjVtOp3+roAVJQY= sha256:r+CYjbrh86U4JEjJjxSspuM7T2T7VJMSUVt7jCmOkyw=
User-Agent: Pan/0.149 (Bellevue; 4c157ba)
Bytes: 1402

On Thu, 21 Nov 2024 08:09:29 +0000, Pancho wrote:

> GOTO was deprecated before BBC Basic circa 1981. I never really saw it,
> apart from reasonable GOTO error usages. Wasn't it more a sign of lack
> of training than a linguistic feature?

I never understood the goto hate that Dijkstra had. It could be used to 
produce hideous code but has valid uses. I'm amused by the syntactic sugar 
used by many languages to conceal what is obviously a goto under the hood 
amd of you dig far enough you get down to JMP, JNE, and similar opcodes.