Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att-cb!att-ih!pacbell!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!husc6!cca!g-rh
From: g-rh@cca.CCA.COM (Richard Harter)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: The D Programming Language: goto
Message-ID: <25396@cca.CCA.COM>
Date: 8 Mar 88 22:45:56 GMT
References: <12159@brl-adm.ARPA> <25350@cca.CCA.COM> <2929@haddock.ISC.COM>
Reply-To: g-rh@CCA.CCA.COM.UUCP (Richard Harter)
Organization: Computer Corp. of America, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 14

In article <2929@haddock.ISC.COM> karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer) writes:

	[Three reasons for retaining goto's.  Plus a compatibility argument.]

I guess I have to give up.  The consensus seems to be that goto's should
be retained, despite their reputation.  "The best programmers use goto's,
but only in private, you know."  Can we settle for lint giving you a warning
if you use a goto? :-)

-- 

In the fields of Hell where the grass grows high
Are the graves of dreams allowed to die.
	Richard Harter, SMDS  Inc.