Re^3: GOTO or not GOTO

I would personally replace it with a redo on a bare block. That bare block would also be a hint to indent the potentially redone section of code, which naturally draws attention to that control structure.

General rule of thumb. Any normal use of goto can be replaced by an entirely equivalent loop control statement, possibly using labels when breaking out of multiple levels of loops. Unless there is a good reason not to, I prefer that approach.

Comment on Re^3: GOTO or not GOTO

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: GOTO or not GOTO by JavaFan (Canon) on Jan 27, 2009 at 12:09 UTC
Any normal use of goto can be replaced by an entirely equivalent loop control statement, possibly using labels when breaking out of multiple levels of loops. This is exactly why in some cases I prefer goto over loop control statements. A loop introduces a block. Variabled my()ed in the block don't live outside them - if they are needed after the block (or goto destination), you have to separate the my() and the first initialization. Which is something I prefer not to. Second, sometimes you encounter code that, if turned into nested loops instead of gotos, will be nested deeply. Which can lead to a narrow strip of code on the right hand side of the window. Now, that doesn't mean I use goto lightly. But I may opt for a goto instead of loop control two or three times a year.	[reply]
Re^5: GOTO or not GOTO by tilly (Archbishop) on Jan 27, 2009 at 13:09 UTC
The problem of declaring a variable in a block I can appreciate as valid. We disagree though on the code which, when turned into nested loops becomes very deep. That is a code smell that tells me that something should probably be rewritten. Obscuring that problem by using gotos just compounds the problem. I would therefore like to see the ugliness of the structure made as apparent as possible, as a prelude to figuring out whether you can rewrite it. Perhaps we work on very different things. But I have never once used goto other than the `goto &foo;` form in anything outside of play code in Perl. And I think it unlikely that I ever will. (Though I would use it in C++.) You may wish to read Re (tilly) 4: Paradigm Shift - when to use goto for an explanation of where I theoretically would use goto. Note that this is theoretical since I have not personally needed it. (Other than for removing the current stack from from the stack.) Incidentally I am amused to see goto defended by a fan of a language without goto. :-)	[reply] [d/l]