Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!pacbell!att-ih!ttrdc!levy From: levy@ttrdc.UUCP (Daniel R. Levy) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Put your code... (was Re: gotos) [ptui] Message-ID: <2597@ttrdc.UUCP> Date: 21 Apr 88 22:17:02 GMT References: <1988Apr11.201934.20594@utzoo.uucp> <451@goofy.megatest.UUCP> <412@yunexus.UUCP> Organization: AT&T, Skokie, IL Lines: 23 In article <412@yunexus.UUCP>, oz@yunexus.UUCP (Ozan Yigit) writes: # >Mr. Spencer, put your code where your mouth is. For each goto example in # >Knuth, show us how you would code it to run equally efficiently without # >gotos. Fair enough? # # Why are the smileys missing from your last paragraph ?? :-) # Have you actually read that article?? (ACM Computing Surveys # V.6 #4 pp. 262-301 Dec. 74) Henry makes a good point # indeed.. [Skip the Reader's Exercises part...:-)] I think # the Knuth article may soon be of interest to Computer # Language historians only. The smileys are missing because I meant it. Henry might well discover that it isn't so easy, nor is the result so superior, as he thinks. He said (to paraphrase) that the whole damn suite of examples does not have one use of GOTO that he would stoop to calling justifiable. That is a serious charge and one which he should either prove or back away from. And why are you so quick to relegate this work to the bit bucket? -- |------------Dan Levy------------| Path: ihnp4,!ttrdc!levy | AT&T | I'm not a real hacker, but I play one on | Data Systems Group | USENET. If you think that AT&T endorses |--------Skokie, Illinois--------| my opinions, I've a nice bridge to sell ya.