Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!ncar!mailrus!uflorida!gatech!hubcap!billwolf
From: billwolf@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe,2847,)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Another reason for goto
Message-ID: <4139@hubcap.UUCP>
Date: 19 Jan 89 17:46:52 GMT
References: <849@primus.cme.nbs.gov>
Sender: news@hubcap.UUCP
Reply-To: billwolf@hubcap.clemson.edu
Distribution: na
Lines: 17

From article <849@primus.cme.nbs.gov>, by leake@cme.nbs.gov (Stephe Leake):
> 
> If I need a fast subroutine, I write it in "low-level" ada; no
> tasks, exceptions, etc; I would feel free to use a goto (although I
> have yet to see a need for one). 

     Tremblay and Sorenson summarize:

        A common thought among proponents of the GOTO is: "I just
        might need it; something might come up."  The answer to this
        appears to be: "Nothing ever does." 



                                       Bill Wolfe

                                wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu