🚀 go-pugleaf

	markg@toledo.emi.net (Mark Grosberg) writes:

	>Robert C Shields (rcshlds@mailserv.mta.ca) wrote:
	>: I am trying to get a feel for how people feel about the GOTO statement... 
	>: please post..

	>Somebody at school saw a goto in my code and freaked. Then again, this 
	>person (who shall remain nameless) is used to machines with 100MB of 
	>memory and dual SPARC CPU's. I on the other hand am not.

	>The code in question was a routine that allocated various resources. 
	>Below is an example of such a thing (this time using OS/2 & C). I use Goto's 
	>to clean up the mess in the event of an error. 

	>Example for a good use of goto:
---                    ????
	>------------------------------------------------------------------------------

	>   HEV    hev1, hev2, hev3;     /* Event semaphores */
	>   HMTX   hmtx;                 /* Mutex semaphore  */ 
	>   void  *ptr;              

	>   if (!DosCreateEventSem(0, &hev1, 0, FALSE))
	>       goto hev1_failed;

	>   if (!DosCreateEventSem(0, &hev2, 0, FALSE))
	>       goto hev2_failed;

	>   if (!DosCreateEventSem(0, &hev3, 0, FALSE))
	>       goto hev3_failed;

	>   if (!DosCreateMutexSem(0, &hmtx, 0, FALSE))
	>       goto hmtx_failed;

	>   if ((ptr = malloc(SOME_SIZE)) == NULL)
	>       goto malloc_failed;

	>   /* Do some stuff here */
	>   return TRUE; /* We did okay */

	>malloc_failed:
	>   DosCloseMutexSem(hmtx);
	>hmtx_failed:
	>   DosCloseEventSem(hev3);
	>hev3_failed:
	>   DosCloseEventSem(hev2);
	>hev2_failed:
	>   DosCloseEventSem(hev1);
	>hev1_failed:
	>   return FALSE;

Is there any reason why the GOTOs can't be replaced by
the particular action routine?

You have the action routines separated from their
respective IFs, by a bunch of code (which may be large).
It makes it clumsy to read such code.