3 ms·
It's like when you say Java has a GOTO. It's in bytecode, in the language as a reserved word, and has a rarely used partial implementation vis-a-vis label: http
by SillyUsername 3y ago
It's like when you say Java has a GOTO. It's in bytecode, in the language as a reserved word, and has a rarely used partial implementation vis-a-vis label:
https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/g-fact-64/ https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/g-fact-64/
Ultimately, thankfully, it never got made into a real keyword.
- tester756 3y ago>Ultimately, thankfully, it never got made into a real keyword. Why "thankfully"?
- ska 3y agocanonically: https://homepages.cwi.nl/~storm/teaching/reader/Dijkstra68.pdf https://homepages.cwi.nl/~storm/teaching/reader/Dijkstra68.p... but see also 50+ years of back and forth on that subject, other opinions available.
- tester756 3y agoThis paper was written in the times where goto was way more powerful than current goto, wasn't it?
- SillyUsername 3y agoI'm guessing you never had to debug spaghetti non OO code that used GOTO or you'd not be asking that question :D
- gugagore 3y agoOO is a lot of things to a lot of people, but it's not "structured control flow".
- tester756 3y agoWhat's difference between debugging spaghetti non OO code from debuggin spaghetti abused OO code? both are terrible mess to debug, yet we aren't calling out ppl using (or even abusing) OOP
- SillyUsername 3y agoNothing from my POV. GOTO is more necessary (or even required) in procedural non OO languages because of fewer constructs to support modelling or structure. The OP mentioned redundant features, and in OO GOTO is redundant.