Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!sdrc!thor!scjones
From: scjones@thor.UUCP (Larry Jones)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: scope of malloc
Message-ID: <207@thor.UUCP>
Date: 20 Nov 90 20:36:05 GMT
References: <3729@skye.ed.ac.uk> <14413@smoke.brl.mil> <2229@kraftbus.opal.cs.tu-berlin.de>
Organization: SDRC, Cincinnati
Lines: 17

In article <2229@kraftbus.opal.cs.tu-berlin.de>, net@opal.cs.tu-berlin.de (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 :-)

I don't know about Doug, but *I* sure reguard callbacks as both tangled
control structures and unstructured braches.  In fact, they seem to be
very closely related to the "altered goto" which seem to be held in more
or less universal contempt.  Mind you, I'm not saying they aren't USEFUL,
just that they're very hard to follow!  
----
Larry Jones                         UUCP: uunet!sdrc!thor!scjones
SDRC                                      scjones@thor.UUCP
2000 Eastman Dr.                    BIX:  ltl
Milford, OH  45150-2789             AT&T: (513) 576-2070
Archaeologists have the most mind-numbing job on the planet. -- Calvin