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=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 1785 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2020 23:45:23 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 1 Dec 2020 23:45:23 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id EA3799C204; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 09:45:17 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAD3F94904; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 09:44:48 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ccil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@ccil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="Iga+rEkh"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 0016D94904; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 09:44:44 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-qt1-f170.google.com (mail-qt1-f170.google.com [209.85.160.170]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0FFF194843 for ; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 09:44:44 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-qt1-f170.google.com with SMTP id f27so2595499qtv.6 for ; Tue, 01 Dec 2020 15:44:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ccil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=vZFGxCxzMfz1pIF0zozCA1max72O2Umf40mDKR39RDQ=; b=Iga+rEkhAgqQBV6nBSaBaewQYpaq51tREinvEes59PvF18pj4P19bGV5RaAjZYUwVj N2c+nt/kE9L6yKqALLM/RTDNQy8vyEioQDkgOvxm837nP3OooJm35mY2dAYUDisE8W7Y JQI8avRMyEug4Gh3C2YRYEwO0PLPds8paNnekTr0XMS/CS8XkaJVrZq3V/H5A8yJENFf 57yNY6yM+8GcddxOm0u4zxI0iMp93SXAq9b51t3b2mfHbs1W4ybGGpAaaICLwTZHp2no LJONDIiwTgZM6L5cmKMzYno2TLUtqtDLkYV4Gq8wvyv3oC7pga1QMtroEVsOO2IbJlLh pHbw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=vZFGxCxzMfz1pIF0zozCA1max72O2Umf40mDKR39RDQ=; b=rxnXy4cmXJgarTdrf5F5BktqWQQijarZg9gt2BazUAQ9e2exG5ybMHUHgMfSzrrUe5 NMhjK7/ANH8hncIF8Xs6oIxG94/iYlouU/EOaj30Iof4FnptgeuihmJzIxczqxgqMApZ CXMTm79dl3P/6dYvbLYjnCdmGLmpuQemFqWZQwB7xxt/Rqzn+BiJf8u+SoUw1WBmJ8fd fJoj2X37Hti6GgiMRnFFF3Ny2z2Nr7UYMRYrIp9ikMq6QzzCCRhX0XCYyILMdkugQjqu DJs3VdGwzTAPLkSzQjlbKeElzL12A/bYi7B7p8BoS3TNRKNqzEG8BfdNGhnvlmrr+Xk0 +q3A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533KcJij3sEgRcBEfteptxcDq6Ur2ACbISgTPgAVLh+O5InBuM7N LCTY180tXzGqdcvHcyL5dkI1efv4hLkIZdnhd4+OVg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxsiCIw4Dp/sgRPXs2HJXZ3Bzi3q+RDLeVwm3uk5ZizcCIO7efX81q7oE3zDhSF3cXZlsvym794O3+LVDPq498= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:6ec5:: with SMTP id f5mr5558653qtv.56.1606866283118; Tue, 01 Dec 2020 15:44:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <15511090.6330.1606835354160.JavaMail.root@zimbraanteil> <202012011538.0B1FcLi5023858@freefriends.org> <202012011639.0B1GdjcD031722@freefriends.org> <20201201202012.-40Ur%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <67EE6390-7E60-442B-AEEA-17951ED759A5@iitbombay.org> In-Reply-To: From: John Cowan Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 18:44:31 -0500 Message-ID: To: Dan Cross Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000001d55c05b56fb610" 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: Bakul Shah , TUHS main list Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --00000000000001d55c05b56fb610 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 3:40 PM Bakul Shah wrote: Along those lines, it's always been interesting to me the way that > Dijkstra's statement about goto must have influenced language design. The > original "GOTO Statement Considered Harmful" note was quite damning, but I > wonder if it meant to be: it strikes me that the really dangerous thing > about "goto" isn't its mere existence or even its use, but rather, it's > unconstrained use when better alternatives exist in the language. As one > can observe in well-written C code, judicious use of `goto` can be quite > elegant in comparison to the alternative. > D-1stra originally sent "Go to [...]" to CACM as a paper entitled "A Case Against The Go To Statement". But the editor, who was Niklaus Wirth, thought it important to publish it quickly, so he turned it into a letter to the editor and retitled it. --00000000000001d55c05b56fb610 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 3:40 PM Bakul Shah &= lt;bakul@iitbombay.org> wrote= :

Along those lines, it'= ;s always been interesting to me the way that Dijkstra's statement abou= t goto must have influenced language design. The original "GOTO Statem= ent Considered Harmful" note was quite damning, but I wonder if it mea= nt to be: it strikes me that the really dangerous thing about "goto&qu= ot; isn't its mere existence or even its use, but rather, it's unco= nstrained use when better alternatives exist in the language. As one can ob= serve in well-written C code, judicious use of `goto` can be quite elegant = in comparison to the alternative.

D-1st= ra originally sent "Go to [...]" to CACM as a paper entitled &quo= t;A Case Against The Go To Statement".=C2=A0 But the editor, who was N= iklaus Wirth, thought it important to publish it quickly, so he turned it i= nto a letter to the editor and retitled it.
=
<= /div>
--00000000000001d55c05b56fb610--