Calling it lobotomized goto is not misplaced but associating an unethical "medical practice" is very deragagory and totally unjustified towards breakelse. The

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