10 No, I'm not interested.
20 Ok, I'll try one.
30 GOTO 20
( Dr Preference AjcuiVd289, Thu 20 Mar 2008, 19:19, 5 replies)

hmmm, now
GOTOs considered harmful. The jury's out on the fegs.
( crackhouseceilidhband Fuck off back to Mumsnet, Thu 20 Mar 2008, 19:29, closed)

Gotos are useful
Eg.

if something
{
  if something else that can't be tested until the 1st if is true
  {
    do this
  }
  else
  {
    goto ELSETHIS
  }
}
else
{
  ELSETHIS:
  do that
}

I mean, you could create a seperate function/method/subroutine and then execute that in both elses, but I think this way is cleaner.

Back on topic, *click*
(Cuthbert Annihilator, Thu 20 Mar 2008, 20:04, closed)

nooo
Dijkstra says no, and Dijkstra wins. GOTOs are a four letter word. Purists don't need 'em!

Although - bollix - I used one in a post two weeks ago. Damn.
( crackhouseceilidhband Fuck off back to Mumsnet, Thu 20 Mar 2008, 20:11, closed)

Pfft.
Nice one, Herr Doctor.
( Spider Fucking Riviera got stiches for a knife wound for the first time, Fri 21 Mar 2008, 0:07, closed)

I agree GOTOs are bad form
If your language guarantees left-to-right evaluation of the if clause, you could just do:

if something && something else that can't be tested until the 1st if is true
{
  do this
}
else
{
  do that
}

...otherwise I much prefer this:

didThis = false
if something
{
  if something else that can't be tested until the 1st if is true
  {
    do this
    didThis = true
  }
}

if not didThis
{
  do that
}
(chase, Mon 24 Mar 2008, 21:21, closed)