From: Uri Guttman >>>>>> "SF" == Shlomi Fish <shlo...@iglu.org.il> writes: > > SF> I should note that in C "continue", "break", and a pre-mature > SF> "return" may also be considered as pseudo-gotos. > > huh? same as perl then. >
I was going to stay out of this, but here I think I want to challenge this assertion. Those three statements are controlled, and will implicitly maintain the block that contains them. Moreover, the "return" will manage exiting the block and subroutine and marshals the context changes that implies. But "goto" is uncontrolled and ignores that context, leaving the stack and related structures in an unknown state. This is what makes it so dangerous. It can also be used to jump into a code block without correctly initializing its structures, creating a even bigger mess. This is from my perspective as a long time Assembler and C programmer. Is it any different in Perl? Bob McConnell -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscr...@perl.org For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-h...@perl.org http://learn.perl.org/
