Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Thu, 21 Jan 1999 16:53:48 -0500 (EST) | | From | Chuck Lever <> | | Subject | Re: Structure vs purism ? |
| |
in any distributed project like this, sometimes coding style is copied for no good reason at all.
however, if a "goto" is used, perhaps some indication could be left in the code about why it was used (fast-path optimization, pruning control nesting, and so on) so future generations won't remove the critical ones. usually when one writes code using uncommon practices, a comment is warranted to explain the obfuscation, but we could get very clever and use C macros :)
On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Philipp Rumpf wrote: > On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 09:58:53PM -0500, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > Then 'tidy' up something so it looks good to 'humans' and do the same > > thing again. You will then learn why there are strange constructs and, > > as you say, a 1000 gotos. > > I think a lot of the goto's could be removed as soon as there is a decent > possibility to tell the compiler to optimize for a certain case. This was > discussed on the egcs lists some time ago IIRC.
- Chuck Lever -- corporate: <chuckl@netscape.com> personal: <chucklever@netscape.net> or <cel@monkey.org>
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |