home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!yale.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!devnull!rgp
- From: rgp@mpd.tandem.com (Ramon Pantin)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: GOTO, was: Tiny proposal for na
- Message-ID: <2378@devnull.mpd.tandem.com>
- Date: 3 Sep 92 19:27:32 GMT
- References: <4192@papaya.bbn.com> <1992Sep2.131733.20676@terminator.cc.umich.edu> <rmartin.715526582@thor>
- Sender: news@devnull.mpd.tandem.com
- Organization: Tandem Computers, Micro-Products Division
- Lines: 54
-
- In article <rmartin.715526582@thor> rmartin@thor.Rational.COM (Bob Martin) writes:
- >potts@itl.itd.umich.edu (Paul Potts) writes:
- >
- >|To make GOTO more readable, NEVER go backwards in your code, only
- >|forwards; use only one GOTO in a block, and comment explicitly. If GOTO
- >|is used only under certain conditions, the argument against writing
- >|spaghetti code really doesn't apply.
-
- >You don't have to make up your own rules. Some other guys, who have
- >thought about it alot, have put together a pretty well thought through
- >set of rules.
-
- Robert Martin means:
- "Don' think. Others have already thought about it for you (and me),
- please don't use your brain, it might hurt."
-
- Paul, you better start listening to the "expert", Robert Martin, he is
- talking about the highest religious experience of them all, Structured
- Programming (SP).
-
- >... Moreover, the industry has, for the most part, accepted
- >those rules as valid.
-
- So if that is the case, then we have to blame all mighty SP for the 100 x 1
- or 1000 x 1 defect ratios (that the expert, Robert Martin, reported) in code
- "made in the U.S.A." vs code "made in Japan" ?
-
- Hope that this doesn't cause another series on "Structured Programming
- and the Software Crisis" by the expert, Robert Martin.
-
- >... Moreover, it has been proven that those rules
- >are always workable, and it has been shown that they help to make code
- >more readable and maintainable.
-
- Paul, the expert says that it has been PROVEN !!!
- I think that the proof method is "reduction to ad-nauseum", some of the
- techniques used in the proof are "kill files" and "reduction of the
- audience to the empty set", this appeared recently in a series of posts
- in comp.lang.c++, to be published by the expert, Robert Martin as the:
-
- "Power User's Guide to Structured Programming in C++,
- Theorems and Formal Proofs
-
- Robert, I'm another one that is sick and tired of this constant and useless
- repetition. Why don't you spare us from your priceless words of wisdom
- and just molest a smaller group of people thru direct email?
-
- If you can't resist some internal need for communicating in broadcast
- mode (exhibitionism? :-) about this topic, I sugest that you set up a
- mail alias and that all the people interested in this topic send you
- their mail addresses to set it up (just imagine your own mini-newsgroup!),
- just don't be disappointed if nobody signs up.
-
- Ramon Pantin
-