🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <141549@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> casey@gauss.llnl.gov (Casey Leedom) writes:
>| From: hrubin@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin)

>| A goto, with no intervening possible exits, should be handled in such a
>| way that that the hardware starts getting the code at the new location
>| early, so that there are no unnecessary delays.  It could even issue
>| instructions from that "new" code in the same way it does from current
>| code.  The "structured" approach, where unconditional transfers are not
>| the rule, prevents this type of optimization.

>  Just because you don't see many explicit "goto"'s in ``structured
>programs'' doesn't mean they aren't there.  They're usually hidden as
>``structured goto's'': e.g. "break" and "continue" in C.

I am quite aware of that.  But there are machines whose architecture
does not have separate fast transfers, but instead have them as part
of a conditional transfer instruction with no condition bits used.

My message was posted to comp.arch only; I raised no software questions.
-- 
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
Phone: (317)494-6054
hrubin@snap.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)  
{purdue,pur-ee}!snap.stat!hrubin(UUCP)