4 ms·

I kind-of agree with parent, but I would define it "subjective" instead of "arbitrary".

• mytailorisrich 5y ago
  Well, as per my previous comment it's not subjective, either. It's a "best practice" in the correct sense of the term. I.e. in most cases it is both not needed and clearer, more structured code may be written without using it. Of course, as for anything, it is useful in a very few cases, emphasis on "very few".
  • scoutt 5y ago
    > improve quality by making the code better structured and easier to follow "clearer" and "structured" doesn't matter from a compiler point of view. Hence the only ones that can judge "clearer" or "structured" is us, human beings, and that's why I think it's subjective. "goto" is seen as "incorrect" only because of mere subjective reasons: "it's not clear", "it's not structured", "I read in a forum that it's bad", etc. The keyword exists, it works as intended, and it's safe to use when used correctly, as all the things around programming languages. To me, Rust code is a mess and I cannot get used to it. It's not "clearer" even if it's proven to be bug free and all that.
    • dnautics 5y ago
      Rust is not proven to be bug free, it's proven to be memory-safe. Rusts compiler will not save you from bugs in business logic; if you can't write lucid rust and the gunning fog of reviewing your code makes it harder to spot a bug it might not be for you.