'goto" gone from computer languages or is it!

[Allison]

>
>Subject: Re: 'goto" gone from computer languages or is it!
>   From: "Dwight K. Elvey" <dwight.elvey at amd.com>
>   Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 10:37:19 -0700 (PDT)
>     To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
>
>Hi
> I'd suspect that most didn't like the goto
>because it becomes hard to implement in a structured
>language. Things like random nesting of subroutines and
>then goto's to various points can make things really
>messed up. There are also the problems of allocated
>memory. Do you keep it or clean it?

Often reading it is the challenge.  Goto within a subroutine
usually reads fine.  Its when there are subs within Loop/whiles
get mixed with gotos.  It's more about readability.  Old basic 
was bad as often people were also cramped for space (especially
interpreted basics.).

> Many think of goto as being similar to jmp in assembly.

It is.

>Actually in a high level language, it is more complicated
>than that. The language tend to lead one to think they
>can use it just anywhere. In assembly, you are more
>conscious ( or should be ) of thing like stack depth
>and allocated space, since you explicitly handle these
>things.

You seem to confuse JMP/Jump/goto with Call/JMS/GOSUB as only
the latter affects the stack (in asm).

In assembly you often have jumps as a result of branch conditions 
In some cpus the logic is actully skip next instuction on condition.
in basic the conditional is IF xx then Goto YYYY (some allow operations.).
The computed goto is only a replacement for SWITCH or IF THEN trees
and a improvement over the latter.

In the end GOTO is not bad, it is random stringy pasta code that can 
result from misuse.


Allison