Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Robert Klemme Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Holy boop: goto for Java Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 00:37:20 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 16 Message-ID: <77a353f2-0933-413a-8e47-df577ba64976@googlegroups.com> References: <6AVyr.1859$8l2.827@newsfe14.iad> NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.0.246.21 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1338795838 28957 127.0.0.1 (4 Jun 2012 07:43:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 07:43:58 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=193.0.246.21; posting-account=MGO7qgoAAABvyo26eHVDO00044spH-ws User-Agent: G2/1.0 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:15034 On Monday, June 4, 2012 9:28:13 AM UTC+2, Arved Sandstrom wrote: > What amazes me is that these individuals support this religious stance=20 > by arguing that it improves readability, when producing little auxiliary= =20 > methods usually does anything but. I am not religious about break / continue (although I use it extremely seld= om, I am more likely to use "return" inside a loop). But I disagree about = your general statement about little auxiliary methods usually not improving= readability. It all depends on the specific case, of course, but giving a= short part of an algorithm a name (with the option to have a place to put = JavaDoc) often helps readability in my experience. Kind regards robert