Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!qantel!lll-lcc!lll-crg!topaz!uwvax!oarv rd!cmcl2!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka
From: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Jumping into blocks
Message-ID: <1324@mmintl.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 28-Apr-86 18:40:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: mmintl.1324
Posted: Mon Apr 28 18:40:15 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 2-May-86 23:46:31 EDT
References: <1370@ism780c.UUCP> <360@hadron.UUCP> <275@copper.UUCP> <737@bentley.UUCP>
Reply-To: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams)
Organization: Multimate International, E. Hartford, CT
Lines: 18

In article <737@bentley.UUCP> kwh@bentley.UUCP writes:
>So, assuming that goatooze are acceptable for error handling, but jumping
>into a block is forbidden, what's the best way to write this?  Use two
>branches, and hide the common code at the bottom of main()?

Yes.  Exception handlers belong at the bottom of the routine.  It isn't
"hidden" there -- that's the first place I would look for it.  I would
describe it as being hidden in your code (for whichever case it is being
jumped to).

Duplicating the code is also acceptable.  It depends mostly on a comparison
of two considerations: (1) how likely are there to be more instances where
the code is to be used in later versions of the routine, and (2) how likely
is it that later versions will want a different error message for the two
cases?

Frank Adams                           ihnp4!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka
Multimate International    52 Oakland Ave North    E. Hartford, CT 06108