Dijkstra does not really distinguish between types of GOTO. He is objecting to the whole concept of GOTO, not just particular "bad" uses of GOTO. > C goto is n

Dijkstra does not really distinguish between types of GOTO. He is objecting to the whole concept of GOTO, not just particular "bad" uses of GOTO. > C goto is not the type of goto that Dijkstra was complaining about. Well C did not exist when Djikstra wrote his article, so I guess this is technically correct. But from his argument it is clear his criticism pertains to any kind of GOTO, not just GOTO's which jumps across function boundaries. While I personally agree that C GOTO is less bad than unconstrained GOTO, that is not a distinction or argument Djikstra makes.