Re: GOTO controversy

Article View: comp.lang.misc

Article #4378

#4378

From: Pete Becker
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 1996 21:29

19 lines
1231 bytes

In article <4hhdcu$43p@due.unit.no>, toriver@pvv.unit.no says...
>
>rav@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU (++           robin) writes:
>[original code example deleted for brevity, see
><URL:news:Dn8pJ8.nqs@emi.net> for details]
>
>>
>>Is there any reason why the GOTOs can't be replaced by
>>the particular action routine?
>
>As he said, backtracking. The alternative would be to include yet another
>function call in each successive if-sentence, making the code ugly.
>Using gotos, the code _can_ be made to express the intended flow much
>better, as in his example.
>
>Are there any other languages than Prolog that implement a "machine" for
>backtracking?

Yup: C++, through destructors.

Technical Details

Message-ID: <4hibo7$nr1@druid.borland.com>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!druid.borland.com!usenet

References: <rcshlds.1.000A6705@mailserv.mta.ca> <Dn8pJ8.nqs@emi.net> <4grt4e$8fg@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU> <4hhdcu$43p@due.unit.no>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!druid.borland.com!usenet
From: pete@borland.com (Pete Becker)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.pl1
Subject: Re: GOTO controversy
Date: 5 Mar 1996 21:29:43 GMT
Organization: Borland International
Message-ID: <4hibo7$nr1@druid.borland.com>
References: <rcshlds.1.000A6705@mailserv.mta.ca> <Dn8pJ8.nqs@emi.net> <4grt4e$8fg@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU> <4hhdcu$43p@due.unit.no>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pbecker.borland.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5

Reply to Parent Message