From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 22090 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2020 15:15:26 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 1 Dec 2020 15:15:26 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 012CE9C245; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 01:15:21 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E82EE9C204; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 01:14:58 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id DECD09C204; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 01:14:55 +1000 (AEST) X-Greylist: delayed 338 seconds by postgrey-1.36 at minnie.tuhs.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2020 01:14:54 AEST Received: from zimbra.anteil.com (zimbra.anteil.com [67.110.179.138]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7BE29C203 for ; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 01:14:54 +1000 (AEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.anteil.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B95891019E; Tue, 1 Dec 2020 10:09:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from zimbra.anteil.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.anteil.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Scpx8QI9ujwO; Tue, 1 Dec 2020 10:09:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from zimbra.anteil.com (zimbra.anteil.com [192.168.1.22]) by zimbra.anteil.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CBB71008E; Tue, 1 Dec 2020 10:09:14 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 10:09:14 -0500 (EST) From: Jim Capp To: jason-tuhs@shalott.net Message-ID: <15511090.6330.1606835354160.JavaMail.root@zimbraanteil> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_6329_12917991.1606835354159" X-Originating-IP: [192.168.200.43] X-Mailer: Zimbra 6.0.7_GA_2476.RHEL4 (ZimbraWebClient - SAF3 (Linux)/6.0.7_GA_2473.UBUNTU8) Subject: Re: [TUHS] The UNIX Command Language (1976) X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" ------=_Part_6329_12917991.1606835354159 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Is it possible the elimination of the GOTO statement in the Bourne Shell was related to a Letter to the Editor in Communications of the ACM, March 1968: "Go To Statement Considered Harmful," by E. Dijkstra. Jim From: jason-tuhs@shalott.net To: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org Sent: Monday, November 30, 2020 10:59:18 PM Subject: Re: [TUHS] The UNIX Command Language (1976) > "The UNIX Command Language is the first-ever paper published on the Unix > shell. It was written by Ken Thompson in 1976." > > https://github.com/susam/tucl Thanks for that. This reminded me that the Thompson shell used goto for flow control, which I had forgotten. Bourne commented on the omission of goto from the Bourne shell, "I eliminated goto in favour of flow control primitives like if and for. This was also considered rather radical departure from the existing practice." Was this decision contentious at all? Was there a specific reason for goto's exclusion in the Bourne shell? Thanks. -Jason ------=_Part_6329_12917991.1606835354159 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <= div style=3D'font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000'= >Is it possible the elimination of the GOTO statement in the Bourne Shellwas related to a Letter to the Editor i= n Communications of the ACM, March 1968:
=09"Go To Statement C= onsidered Harmful," by E. Dijkstra.

Jim

=

From: jason-tuhs@shalott.net
T= o: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2020 10:59= :18 PM
Subject: Re: [TUHS] The UNIX Command Language (1976)

> "The UNIX Command Language is the first-ever paper publishe= d on the Unix
> shell. It was written by Ken Thompson in 1976."
&= gt;
> https://github.com/susam/tucl

Thanks for that.

T= his reminded me that the Thompson shell used goto for flow control, which <= br>I had forgotten.

Bourne commented on the omission of goto from th= e Bourne shell, "I
eliminated goto in favour of flow control primitives= like if and for.
This was also considered rather radical departure fro= m the existing
practice."

Was this decision contentious at all? =  Was there a specific reason for
goto's exclusion in the Bourne sh= ell?


Thanks.


  -Jason
------=_Part_6329_12917991.1606835354159--