Messages in this thread | | | From | (H. Peter Anvin) | Subject | Re: Structure vs purism ? | Date | 21 Jan 1999 23:14:15 GMT |
| |
Followup to: <19990121144521.A24352@insula.conspiracy> By author: Philipp Rumpf <prumpf@jcsbs.lanobis.de> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > 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. >
One thing: "goto" is really the only sane way in C to implement a so-called posit/admit structure, which *is* recognized by structural programming -- you assume that it is going to be OK, but need to do cleanup if you bail. Sometimes an early return or "return do_cleanup();" is acceptable, but if the function needs to do cleanup using local variables, then there is no real choice.
-hpa
-- PGP: 2047/2A960705 BA 03 D3 2C 14 A8 A8 BD 1E DF FE 69 EE 35 BD 74 See http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/ for web page and full PGP public key I am Bahá'í -- ask me about it or see http://www.bahai.org/ "To love another person is to see the face of God." -- Les Misérables
- 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/
| |