Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!yale!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: scope of malloc
Message-ID: <22234:Nov1619:56:0290@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 16 Nov 90 19:56:02 GMT
References: <2182@kraftbus.opal.cs.tu-berlin.de> <14437@smoke.brl.mil> <2229@kraftbus.opal.cs.tu-berlin.de>
Organization: IR
Lines: 10

In article <2229@kraftbus.opal.cs.tu-berlin.de> net@tubopal.UUCP (Oliver Laumann) writes:
> In what way did the program fragment in my article qualify as spaghetti
> code?  Do you regard "callback functions" as a tangled control structure
> or an unstructured branching construct (in this case you must really
> hate X11 :-)

As callback functions and object-oriented programming are essentially
equivalent, I'd be amused to see the former declared ``unstructured.''

---Dan