Re^3: Need help converting!!! (goto)

"goto" is older.

Many highlevel constructs are just gotos in disguise and their documentation still contains expressions like "go to beginning of loop"

A language agnostic algorithm description might still say "go to" (like in this case)

And because most use cases have been abstracted away doesn't mean there are no legit applications left for goto

Cheers Rolf
_{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :)

Je suis Charlie!}

Comment on Re^3: Need help converting!!! (goto)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Need help converting!!! by james28909 (Deacon) on Nov 16, 2015 at 04:32 UTC
well, i was just trying to understand it honestly, because in all the CRAZY shit i have had perl do , it has paid off, and i havent ever used "goto". but just because i have never used it, doesnt meant there isnt a reason to use it i reckon. im just a novice anyway, but i do appreciate the user-bility of perl. its like the "engrish" of the computing language :)	[reply]
Re^4: Need help converting!!! (goto) by Preceptor (Deacon) on Nov 16, 2015 at 17:29 UTC
Indeed - processors don't loop, they just `jmp` - which is extremely similar to the `goto` that is considered harmful. Fortunately, we have higher level constructs available. (Although even then, I'll often `last` out of a loop)	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^5: Need help converting!!! (goto) by LanX (Saint) on Nov 16, 2015 at 17:53 UTC
> I'll often last out of a loop Exactly: `last` , `next` , `redo` , ... are just gotos with restrictions. Throwing exceptions is also a kind of goto. I remember a talk where TheDamian showed code which was not better written without goto. Knowing that fire is dangerous led to new methods for heating, cooking and constructing lamps. But this doesn't mean lighters and matches have no use left and must be strictly forbidden. Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :) Je suis Charlie!} PS: `next EXPR` since 5.18? Wow I missed that one ... (??? o.O ???)	[reply] [d/l]
Re^5: Need help converting!!! (goto) by afoken (Chancellor) on Nov 17, 2015 at 05:38 UTC
Indeed - processors don't loop, they just jmp Right in general, wrong in detail. The x86 family has the `rep`, `repz` and `repnz` prefixes since at least 1978 that each implement an implicit while loop in combination with "string" instructions `cmps`, `ins`, `lods`, `movs`, `outs`, `scas`, `stos`, without any jumps in assembly code. Alexander -- Today I will gladly share my knowledge and experience, for there are no sweeter words than "I told you so". ;-)	[reply] [d/l] [select]