Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!cmcl2!lanl!jlg
From: jlg@lanl.ARPA (Jim Giles)
Newsgroups: net.lang
Subject: Re: and if you put this...Structure
Message-ID: <1257@lanl.ARPA>
Date: Tue, 1-Apr-86 17:44:27 EST
Article-I.D.: lanl.1257
Posted: Tue Apr  1 17:44:27 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 5-Apr-86 06:33:41 EST
References: <1187@mmintl.UUCP> <6925@cca.UUCP>
Reply-To: jlg@a.UUCP (Jim Giles)
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 17

In article <6925@cca.UUCP> g-rh@cca.UUCP (Richard Harter) writes:
>	Au contraire, "structured programming" == GOTOless programming.

Depends on which definition of 'structured programming' you use.  There
is STRUCTURED PROGRAMMING, which is a religion which worships at the alter
of the god NOGOTO (These are capitalized because, well, that's the way
religous people think). Then, there is structured programming, which is
a programming discipline use to design, layout, and implement programs and
is completely independent of the syntax of the language used.

Anyone that doesn't use structured programming should probably worship
STRUCTURED PROGRAMMING - GOTOs really are dangerous to such people.  On
the other hand, if you DO use structured programming, then GOTOs are not
any more dangerous than any other tool.

J. Giles
Los Alamos