Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site hcradm.UUCP
Path: utzoo!hcrvax!hcradm!steve
From: steve@hcradm.UUCP (Steve Pozgaj)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: mildly obfuscating c
Message-ID: <2434@hcradm.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 9-Dec-85 20:11:41 EST
Article-I.D.: hcradm.2434
Posted: Mon Dec  9 20:11:41 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 10-Dec-85 00:32:03 EST
References: <564@puff.UUCP>
Reply-To: steve@hcradm.UUCP (Steve Pozgaj)
Organization: Human Computing Resources, Toronto
Lines: 27

In article <564@puff.UUCP> tom@puff.UUCP writes:
>i haven't been able to figure out anyway to "goto" a label that
>i don't know.  for example, i would like to do this:
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>main() {
>	int (*jump[])() = { l1,l2,l3,l4,l5,l6,l7,l8 }
>
>	l1: /* code */
>	l2: /* code */
>	l3: /* code */
>	l4: /* code */
>	l5: /* code */
>	l6: /* code */
>	l7: /* code */
>	l8: /* code */
>
>	goto *jump[whatever]
>}
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>
>aside from the forward-referencing problem of the unseen labels, 
>this is a still syntax error.   anyone have any way to do this?

Yes, it's called a "switch" statement, and was designed to obviate the need for
people translating Fortran to C and attempting to kludge out a computed goto.
A little careful rethought can usually recast computed goto's in a switch.