Re: goto considered helpful

bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:

On 13/12/2024 13:19, David Brown wrote:

On 13/12/2024 12:12, bart wrote:

[...]

I've had a quick look through my codebases (not C), and I couldn't
see an example of a numbered break. All I could find was the
equivalant of:
>
    break              # the vast majority
    break all
>
The latter breaks out of the outermost loop.
>

So you have a feature (numbered breaks) in your language that you
never use, but have been recommending here as a useful addition to
C?

>
I'm saying that if you don't have the general feature, then the more
limited one might be worth considering, as it will take care of most
of the use-cases not covered by break.

In current C, we don't have either feature.

I suggest that covering *most* of the use-cases would not be good
enough.  Adding your "break all" to C (defining it in the standard
and implementing it in compilers) would not be significantly easier
than adding "break LABEL".  I see no point in adding a partial
feature when a more complete feature is (a) just as easy, and (b)
has ample precedent in other languages.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */