3 ms·

It is good old "goto" from Basic, but is a specially lobotomized "goto" instead of having the full power of a normal "goto". And the article's author goes like

• avgcorrection 3y ago
  > Novel? For what year? 1970? Definitely not for 2023 Yeah I sometimes see this sentiment that you don't really need something roughly like sum types and higher-order functions to do things like chaining on them; you just need this one little special-cased keyword that will do 95% of what you want.
• FeepingCreature 3y ago
  I realize this is a bit passe, but there were reasonable arguments brought back then about goto and its harmfulness, that I personally find very convincing. :P Do you have precedent for something like breakelse as an explicit operation?
• hirako2000 3y ago
  Calling it lobotomized goto is not misplaced but associating an unethical "medical practice" is very deragagory and totally unjustified towards breakelse. The novelty is not making goto worse, it makes it better. Let me rephrase your statement and see whether the claim that this isn't worth calling it novel stoll stands: > It is good old "goto" once found in many early programming languages, which overtime prove too dangerous even in the hands of great coders hence faded away. The author proposes a safe, goto in disguise, mechanism that can be used as optimisation. May I ask how many novelty aren't either a simple iteration over some existing idea, bringing together some existing ideas, or removing some undesired side effect of an idea