> Now, it's provable you never *NEED* a goto. On the other hand,
*judicious*
> use of goto can prevent code that is so cluttered with stuff of the form:
> if(...) {
> ...
> die_flag = 1;
> if (!die _flag) {...
>
> Pretty soon, you have die_1_flag, die_2_flag, die_3_flag and so on,
> rather than 3 or 4 "goto bail_now;".
There's always the construction:
for(;;)
{
/* do something */
if (something_failed)
break;
/* do something */
if (something_failed)
break;
...
break; /* the final break */
}
etc.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo _at_ vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
References:
- Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?Valdis.Kletnieks
- Prev by Date: 2.4.20 kernel crashes while scanning partition list
- Next by Date: reading from devices in RAW mode
- Previous by thread: Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?
- Next by thread: Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?
- Indexes:[Main][Thread]