Ah....the old goto arguing....how many beers have gone with it!
Linus is just right, since everyday the purists of the OO languages
still can't live without writing a GOTO; they just call it in another
"politically correct" way:
raise Exception.Create("TA-DA!")
R#
2008/4/15, Joost van der Sluis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Op dinsdag 15-04-2008 om 10:18 uur [tijdzone +0300], schreef ik:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have read in the Linux Kernel malling list some emails, and I found
> > some points made by Linus Torvalds about Pasca;
> >
> >
> http://idkn.wordpress.com/2008/04/15/the-reason-why-linus-torvalds-hate-pascal/
> >
>
>
> Your statement in the blog-posting is not entirely true. What Linus does
> in this thread is arguing why goto's could be meaningfull sometimes.
> Apparently he thinks that the idea that goto's are evil in all cases
> comes from Nikolaus Wirth. To prove that he (Wirth) was wrong, he points
> at some weaknesses of the language that Wirth had developed. And that
> was indeed this old pascal version. This language didn't had any goto's
> but that didn't make it more readable. It would even be more readable if
> it had support for goto. (That's Linus statement)
>
> Linus also put (traditional) before pascal, just to make this clear. So
> I don't see this as a 'rant on pascal', but just arguing with some
> examples of older languages that goto's could be good in some cases.
>
>
> Joost.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
> http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
>
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
