Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #10271
| Path | csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: Thoughts on function |
| Date | Mon, 19 Sep 2011 13:26:21 +0900 |
| Lines | 20 |
| Message-ID | <87aaa117ki.fsf@catnip.gol.com> (permalink) |
| References | <19d88541-0f1e-4fa5-90dd-9ff8c23046f3@19g2000vbx.googlegroups.com> <9ddfi0F784U12@mid.individual.net> <85a545df-d6b9-4e67-9570-4d2aab13b8c3@f41g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> <9df2i4F2gmU11@mid.individual.net> <0d205a4f-b6d5-494e-baf1-b5add2798806@o9g2000vbo.googlegroups.com> <880af656-7aaf-4e4c-baa8-91ae77d541e4@f41g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> <9dn6ekFr5dU8@mid.individual.net> <d5a55708-e02d-4409-8ee1-7c23573e0a51@c22g2000yqa.googlegroups.com> <857d77ha9jeomb1kbcti9psermtsh4e5j4@4ax.com> |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain |
| X-Trace | individual.net AX0Xy254kkCWg4CscqTIXArkXe7HI5JMccO4ns59P89hLTF8HG |
| Cancel-Lock | sha1:yLqyIIfj41rlcRy/Npo8Ukf/v7w= sha1:9SE3O1/vG0zcKSon4A2CR+8/P8Q= |
| System-Type | x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu |
| Xref | x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.c++:10271 |
Show key headers only | View raw
Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> writes: > Refactor your function, get rid of the goto's. They are bad practice. But let's be fair -- while goto is often[*] used badly, and in such cases makes code harder to understand/maintain, it isn't somehow the kiss of death. There are reasonable uses of goto. So although the presence of "goto" in code is a big warning sign (especially in C++, where RIAA tends to supplant "goto for error cleanup" idioms), is seems unreasonable to thus grade code a "1" without actually looking at the details of how its used. [*] maybe less so these days than in the past, as it's acquired such a huge negative reputation that non-clueful programmers are likely to avoid it entirely on that basis. -Miles -- Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious.
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Thoughts on function Ebenezer <woodbrian77@gmail.com> - 2011-09-14 22:01 -0700
Re: Thoughts on function Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-09-15 17:08 +1200
Re: Thoughts on function Ebenezer <woodbrian77@gmail.com> - 2011-09-15 07:34 -0700
Re: Thoughts on function Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-09-16 07:38 +1200
Re: Thoughts on function Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-09-15 20:40 +0100
Re: Thoughts on function Ebenezer <woodbrian77@gmail.com> - 2011-09-15 17:23 -0700
Re: Thoughts on function Ebenezer <woodbrian77@gmail.com> - 2011-09-18 13:30 -0700
Re: Thoughts on function Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-09-19 09:34 +1200
Re: Thoughts on function Ebenezer <woodbrian77@gmail.com> - 2011-09-18 18:25 -0700
Re: Thoughts on function Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2011-09-18 19:08 -0700
Re: Thoughts on function Ebenezer <woodbrian77@gmail.com> - 2011-09-18 19:46 -0700
Re: Thoughts on function Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2011-09-18 20:12 -0700
Re: Thoughts on function Ebenezer <woodbrian77@gmail.com> - 2011-09-18 21:28 -0700
Re: Thoughts on function Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2011-09-19 13:26 +0900
Re: Thoughts on function Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-09-19 16:45 +1200
Re: Thoughts on function Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2011-09-19 15:19 +0900
Re: Thoughts on function Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-09-19 16:43 +1200
Re: Thoughts on function Ebenezer <woodbrian77@gmail.com> - 2011-09-19 11:16 -0700
Re: Thoughts on function Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-09-20 07:44 +1200
Re: Thoughts on function Ebenezer <woodbrian77@gmail.com> - 2011-09-19 18:03 -0700
Re: Thoughts on function Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-09-20 13:15 +1200
Re: Thoughts on function Ebenezer <woodbrian77@gmail.com> - 2011-09-19 18:27 -0700
Re: Thoughts on function Fulvio Esposito <esposito.fulvio@gmail.com> - 2011-09-16 02:19 -0700
Re: Thoughts on function Ebenezer <woodbrian77@gmail.com> - 2011-09-16 11:20 -0700
Re: Thoughts on function Fulvio Esposito <esposito.fulvio@gmail.com> - 2011-09-16 13:51 -0700
Re: Thoughts on function hanukas <jukka@liimatta.org> - 2011-09-19 06:19 -0700
csiph-web