On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 08:48:10 -0400, shawn wilson wrote:
> but, sense it is jumping to a different place in the stack, isn't it
> more efficient than doing the above mentioned
>
> my $done = 0;
> while( !$done ){
>$done = 1 if( contition );
>do_work;
> }
>
> vs
>
> for(;;) {
>goto DON
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Peter Scott wrote:
> The perldoc for
> goto says he has never found a reason to use it.
Though to be complete:
perldoc -f goto said:
> The author of Perl has never felt the need to use this form of
> "got
On 15/04/2011 13:48, shawn wilson wrote:
but, sense it is jumping to a different place in the stack, isn't it
more efficient than doing the above mentioned
my $done = 0;
while( !$done ){
$done = 1 if( contition );
do_work;
}
vs
for(;;) {
goto DONE if( contition );
do_work;
}
l
On 11-04-15 08:48 AM, shawn wilson wrote:
my $done = 0;
while( !$done ){
$done = 1 if( contition );
do_work;
}
vs
for(;;) {
goto DONE if( contition );
do_work;
}
label DONE;
for(;;){
do_work;
goto DONE if( condition );
}
DONE:
The first loop always executes `do_work` even
On 11-04-15 08:26 AM, Bob McConnell wrote:
But "goto" is uncontrolled and ignores that
context, leaving the stack and related structures in an unknown state.
This is from my perspective as a long time Assembler and C programmer.
Is it any different in Perl?
Yes. It sets the state correctly.
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Peter Scott wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:47:17 -0700, sono-io wrote:
>
>> On Apr 14, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Uri Guttman wrote:
>>
>>> goto just shouldn't be in your vocabulary. there is no reason for it at
>>> all in any decent language, especially perl.
>>
>>
From: Uri Guttman
>> "SF" == Shlomi Fish writes:
>
> SF> I should note that in C "continue", "break", and a pre-mature
> SF> "return" may also be considered as pseudo-gotos.
>
> huh? same as perl then.
>
I was going to stay out of this, but here I think I want to challenge
this assertio
On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:47:17 -0700, sono-io wrote:
> On Apr 14, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Uri Guttman wrote:
>
>> goto just shouldn't be in your vocabulary. there is no reason for it at
>> all in any decent language, especially perl.
>
> I've been following this thread and I'm just curious. If g
On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 20:44:57 +0100, Rob Dixon wrote:
> [ Good arguments about goto ]
> A final note, perldoc perlsyn says
>
> A loop's LABEL is not actually a valid target for a goto; it's just
> the name of the loop.
>
> and I am left wondering what this means, as I have had no problem
> wri
> "s" == sono-io writes:
s> On Apr 14, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Uri Guttman wrote:
>> goto just shouldn't be in your vocabulary. there is no reason for it at
all in any decent language, especially perl.
s>I've been following this thread and I'm just curious. If goto
s>is so bad,
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Brandon McCaig wrote:
> catch:
> // Cleanup all allocated resources and ignore unallocated
> // ones (that is, no matter where in the function the goto is
> // called it should work properly and not crash the
> // application)...
I forgot to mention th
At 23:00 +0300 14/04/2011, Shlomi Fish wrote:
In Perl, I don't encourage people using goto statements, and I did not find a
use for them in Perl, yet. But I don't rule out that they have legitimate use
in other languages...
int alloc_stuff(struct_t * * ref)
{
Let's stick to Perl and stop bo
> "BM" == Brandon McCaig writes:
BM> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Uri Guttman wrote:
>> that can still be done very cleanly without gotos. one technique is to
>> collect all the resources into a structure as you initialize. at any
>> point when it fails, you return to an outer f
> "SF" == Shlomi Fish writes:
SF> Well, some use cases for goto in C:
SF> 1. Breaking out of more outer loop (as there is no "continue label;" or
"break
SF> label;" in C:
SF>
SF> for (i=0 ; i < len ; i++)
SF> {
SF> for (j = 0
SF> {
SF> if (func(i, j)
On 14/04/2011 19:36, Shlomi Fish wrote:
>
> I should note that in C "continue", "break", and a pre-mature "return" may
> also be considered as pseudo-gotos.
Indeed. Funtionally, Perl has many keywords that transfer control to a
different place in the code (next, break, continue, return, if, elsif
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Uri Guttman wrote:
>> "BM" == Brandon McCaig writes:
> BM> I often use gotos in C for error handling within a function. If
> BM> you're allocating resources and something later on fails then you
> BM> usually want (or need) to clean up those resources befor
On 11-04-14 02:36 PM, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> On Thursday 14 Apr 2011 17:47:02 Uri Guttman wrote:
> then you don't know how to code well in c.
Thanks for the compliment.;-)
> it may not be as nice as perl
> for some flow control things but goto is never needed in c either.
Thanks for avoiding
Hi Uri,
On Thursday 14 Apr 2011 17:47:02 Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "SF" == Shlomi Fish writes:
> SF> On Thursday 14 Apr 2011 09:15:35 Uri Guttman wrote:
> >> > "PS" == Peter Scott writes:
> PS> Here is the definitive explanation:
> >> http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/ PS> ewd02xx/
On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:05:54 +0300, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> Hi Uri and Peter,
>>
> Regarding the "Goto statement considered harmful" myth, see what I wrote
> about it here:
"Myth" is generally used to descibe something widely thought to be true
that is in fact false. The assertion that goto is ha
On 11-04-14 01:47 PM, sono...@fannullone.us wrote:
On Apr 14, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Uri Guttman wrote:
goto just shouldn't be in your vocabulary. there is no reason for it at all in
any decent language, especially perl.
I've been following this thread and I'm just curious. If goto is s
On Apr 14, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Uri Guttman wrote:
> goto just shouldn't be in your vocabulary. there is no reason for it at all
> in any decent language, especially perl.
I've been following this thread and I'm just curious. If goto is so
bad, why did they add it to Perl?
Marc
--
To un
> "BM" == Brandon McCaig writes:
BM> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:47 AM, Uri Guttman
wrote:
>> then you don't know how to code well in c. it may not be as
>> nice as perl for some flow control things but goto is never
>> needed in c either. i have seen it used and there are always
>
On 11-04-14 12:52 PM, Brandon McCaig wrote:
I often use gotos in C for error handling within a function. If
you're allocating resources and something later on fails then you
usually want (or need) to clean up those resources before
returning. I've seen a lot of people duplicate the same cleanup
c
(Sorry, Uri, meant to reply to the list...)
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:47 AM, Uri Guttman wrote:
> then you don't know how to code well in c. it may not be as
> nice as perl for some flow control things but goto is never
> needed in c either. i have seen it used and there are always
> better ways
> "SF" == Shlomi Fish writes:
SF> On Thursday 14 Apr 2011 09:15:35 Uri Guttman wrote:
>> > "PS" == Peter Scott writes:
PS> Here is the definitive explanation:
>> http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/ PS> ewd02xx/EWD215.PDF .
>>
>> having heard about that article for many year
On 11-04-14 12:57 AM, Mariano Loza Coll wrote:
I have yet to find one that explains
clearly the reasons arguing against its use.
It's a religious thing. It is far better to hide your gotos in a state
machine than to expose them to light.
Example of a state machine with hidden gotos:
my $do
Hi Uri and Peter,
On Thursday 14 Apr 2011 09:15:35 Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "PS" == Peter Scott writes:
> PS> On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:57:53 -0700, Mariano Loza Coll wrote:
> >> Like Owen, I've come across many a recommendation AGAINST using goto
> >> in Perl. And (like Owen?), I have yet t
> "PS" == Peter Scott writes:
PS> On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:57:53 -0700, Mariano Loza Coll wrote:
>> Like Owen, I've come across many a recommendation AGAINST using goto in
>> Perl. And (like Owen?), I have yet to find one that explains clearly the
>> reasons arguing against its use. If
On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:57:53 -0700, Mariano Loza Coll wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>> OC> I never bothered to learn how
>> OC> to use goto because it's deprecated (or on it's way?), but it OC>
>> seems like this would be a good place to use it. At the same OC>
>> time, I understand that use of goto is
> "MLC" == Mariano Loza Coll writes:
MLC> Hi all,
>> OC> I never bothered to learn how
>> OC> to use goto because it's deprecated (or on it's way?), but it
>> OC> seems like this would be a good place to use it. At the same
>> OC> time, I understand that use of goto is akin to
Hi all,
> OC> I never bothered to learn how
> OC> to use goto because it's deprecated (or on it's way?), but it
> OC> seems like this would be a good place to use it. At the same
> OC> time, I understand that use of goto is akin to sleeping with your
> OC> sister among most programmers in th
> "OC" == Owen Chavez writes:
OC> I'm writing a script for work that navigates users through a
OC> complex decision-making tree, where decisions are made based on
OC> some fairly in-depth processing of data entered by the user. The
OC> script runs really well, does exactly what we ne
32 matches
Mail list logo
