in reply to
Re: GOTO considered (a necessary) evil?
in thread GOTO considered (a necessary) evil?
i'm beginning to think there should be optional warnings for goto
usage. perhaps use warnings 'goto'; could warn on goto LABEL and goto
EXPR, but pass goto &NAME.
I think that is a very bad idea. Warnings are there to prevent programmers
from making accidental
mistakes. Warnings are done if
variables have unexpected values (comparing integers with ==
adding undefined values, dereferencing non-references), when you try
to do something that cannot be done (open a bi-directional pipe), use a
deprecated feature (implicite @_), or did something you probably didn't
want to do (exiting eval with next
ing the same
variable twice in the same context</code>), etc, etc.
But the use of goto is not deprecated, and you will not get
much support to get it deprecated. And it's hardly likely someone types
goto by accident.
Warning should be used to prevent programmers from making mistakes -
as soon as warnings will be misused to force a coding style upon
programmers, use of use warnings and -w
will plummit - and rightly so. Forcing a coding style, one way or the
other, upon something else is Pythonesque.