Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

On Sun, Jan 12, 2003 at 03:18:38PM -0500, [e-mail] wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 14:59:57 EST, Rob Wilkens said:
> 
> > In general, if you can structure your code properly, you should never
> > need a goto, and if you don't need a goto you shouldn't use it.  It's
> > just "common sense" as I've always been taught.  Unless you're
> > intentionally trying to write code that's harder for others to read.
> 
> Now, it's provable you never *NEED* a goto.  On the other hand, *judicious*
> use of goto can prevent code that is so cluttered with stuff of the form:
> 
>         if(...) {
> 		...
> 		die_flag = 1;
> 		if (!die _flag) {...
> 		
> Pretty soon, you have die_1_flag, die_2_flag, die_3_flag and so on,
> rather than 3 or 4 "goto bail_now;".
> 
> The real problem is that C doesn't have a good multi-level "break" construct.

longjump. Used with good effect in the plan9 code.

Probably takes more coordination than is possible in Linux and has marginal
benefit, but it looks nice.

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------
Victor Yodaiken 
Finite State Machine Labs: The RTLinux Company.
www.fsmlabs.com  www.rtlinux.com
1+ 505 838 9109