Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!samsung!umich!sharkey!tygra!dave
From: dave@tygra.ddmi.com (David Conrad)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.pascal
Subject: Re: IMPLEMENT GOTO ACROSS MODULES IN TURBO PASCAL??
Summary: GOTO Considered Harmful
Message-ID: <1991Jan9.093732.25047@tygra.ddmi.com>
Date: 9 Jan 91 09:37:32 GMT
References: <11656@j.cc.purdue.edu> <7147@tekgen.BV.TEK.COM> <11661@j.cc.purdue.edu>
Organization: Moore Software, Detroit, MI
Lines: 47

In article <11661@j.cc.purdue.edu> zhou@brazil.psych.purdue.edu (Albert Zhou) writes:
>
>This reminds me of the suggestion made by some researchers to eliminate goto's
>altogether. Personally, I don't promote using goto's even within a block.
>Instead of using:
>
>		repeat
>		  s1;
>		  s2; 
>		  if c then goto out;
>		  s3;
>		until forever;
>		out:;
>
>I use:
>		repeat
>		  s1;
>		  s2;
>		  s3;	
>		until c;
>
>However, in rare cases, s3 can be very time-consuming and by using the first
>code, one can save the time to execute s3 when c is true.
>

You could just use:
               repeat
                 s1;
                 s2;
                 if not c then s3;
               until c;

I've often seen it stated that there are situations where goto's are
unavoidable, but I've never seen an instance of such a situation.  Even
finite state machines can be implemented by case statements, although
if the case statements evaluate to nested if's instead of a jump table
then I can see where one would rather use goto's to emulate the jump
table.  Or, with procedural types (call by name), you could actually
code a jump table in an array.
--
David R. Conrad
dave@tygra.ddmi.com
-- 
=  CAT-TALK Conferencing Network, Computer Conferencing and File Archive  =
-  1-313-343-0800, 300/1200/2400/9600 baud, 8/N/1. New users use 'new'    - 
=  as a login id.  AVAILABLE VIA PC-PURSUIT!!! (City code "MIDET")        =
   E-MAIL Address: dave@DDMI.COM