Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: nyu notesfiles V1.1 4/1/84; site down.FUN
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!down!honey
From: honey@down.FUN
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Breaking out - the ratfor approach
Message-ID: <3200003@down.FUN>
Date: Mon, 5-Nov-84 13:41:00 EST
Article-I.D.: down.3200003
Posted: Mon Nov  5 13:41:00 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 6-Nov-84 06:59:43 EST
References: <2122@usceast.UUCP>
Organization: The Official Fun Machine of Princeton University EECS
Lines: 13
Nf-ID: #R:usceast:-212200:down:3200003:000:631
Nf-From: down!honey    Nov  5 13:41:00 1984


/***** down:net.lang.c / desint!geoff / 11:02 pm  Nov  4, 1984*/
...  Um, oops.  I must be getting senile.  As Peter Honeyman also
pointed out, what Dijkstra was actually saying was that the
unrestricted USE of GOTO's made programs less optimizable.  ...
/* ---------- */

i never said any such thing!  (the *only* circumstances under which i
cite dijkstra are those that require generalization from a single
example.)  i *did* say that even programs that use goto's are (almost
always) reducible (er, flow-graph-wise -- ref. knuth, brenda baker) --
this observation seems to have gotten twisted around in the translation.
	peter