Subject:
|
Re: Encoding? (was Re: This isn't good enough!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.fun
|
Date:
|
Thu, 13 Jul 2000 19:38:06 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
JSPROAT@IO.COMnomorespam
|
Viewed:
|
593 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Sproaticus wrote:
> > 10 PRINT "GOTO'S SUCK!"
> Is GOTO alright if it's spelled HREF?
Isn't an HREF more like a GOSUB? There's a call (okay, return) stack, and you
can ride it all the way back to the first page. And GOSUBs are okay. I give
them my Official Stamp of Approval. :-,
Or you could take the pont of view that a HREF is like a spawn() call,
blocking subprocess until the subprocess calls exit().
But yeah, I was a bit harsh about GOTO. It is a useful call, esp. in the
lower-level languages like assembler. But after making the transition from
flow-oriented programming to procedure-oriented programming (and then again
into object-oriented), GOTO just makes the code that much more difficult to
understand and in some places wreaks havoc with the call stack. I remember a
stack *underflow* problem I had with Turbo Pascal once...
Cheers,
- jsproat
--
Jeremy H. Sproat <jsproat@io.com> ~~~ http://www.io.com/~jsproat/
Uh, two. Including this one.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
48 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
