kjm@ut-ngp.UUCP (05/28/86)
[] >>C already has a multi-level break statement. It's spelled "goto." >>Putting a goto in a costume doesn't disguise it. [Andrew Koenig, I think] >When a human reading a program sees 'break', it is immediately known >that the current loop is being abandoned. In order to determine the >effect of a goto, you have to find its destination. If you don't >believe there is a big difference, try maintaining someone else's >BAS*C code sometime. [Greg Smith] In order to determine the effect of a multi-level break, you have to figure out which block it's terminating. Maintaining code with lots of multi-level breaks sounds like a programmer's nightmare, too. Consider: you always know exactly what the goto is going to do. But with a multi-level break, it is possible to make a modification which changes the number of interior blocks between one (or more) break(s) and its (their) intended target(s). This sounds like an excellent way to introduce very subtle bugs. Thus I think the explicit goto is cleaner in this situation. >You're absolutely right. Let's all use K&R C only for the rest of time. >[Greg Smith] Given some of the suggestions made on this newsgroup by you, Mr. Smith, by K. W. Heuer (i.e., indentation instead of braces), and by various others, this might not be a bad idea at all!! [From another article, about what to call "improved" C...] >Sorry, I don't think you can call it PL/2! >IBM was going to call PL/1 "NPL" (New Programming Language?) until >National Physical Laboratories told them not to. They then registered >names PL/1 ... PL/100 (!). I don't think they reserved PL/0. >[Dean Elsner] How about calling this new language "C--" ? (0.1 :-)) -- The above viewpoints are mine. They are unrelated to those of anyone else, including my cat and my employer. Ken Montgomery "Shredder-of-hapless-smurfs" ...!{ihnp4,allegra,seismo!ut-sally}!ut-ngp!kjm [Usenet, when working] kjm@ngp.{ARPA,UTEXAS.EDU} [Old/New Internet; depends on nameserver operation] kjm@ngp.CC.UTEXAS.EDU [Very New Internet; may require nameserver operation]
nather@ut-sally.UUCP (Ed Nather) (05/29/86)
C is a tight, internally-consistent, practical and usable language. Rather
than butcher it, I suggest we leave it the hell alone. It is the best and
most economical language I have ever used, and I've used more of them than
I can count.
--
Ed Nather
Astronomy Dept, U of Texas @ Austin
{allegra,ihnp4}!{noao,ut-sally}!utastro!nather
nather@astro.AS.UTEXAS.EDU