On Friday, 5 October 2018 at 16:02:49 UTC, Nick Treleaven wrote:
On Thursday, 4 October 2018 at 06:43:02 UTC, Gopan wrote:
I have seen people enclosing the function logic inside a
while(1) merely to stick on to single return at the end.
while(1)
{
...
break; //otherwise return would come here.
...
break;
}
return ...;
I think `switch (0) default:` is better, because it's not a
loop so the intent is clear - no continue statements somewhere
below (so it's also better than `do ... while (0);`). Also you
might forget the final break statement with `while` and get an
infinite loop.
`do ... while (0);` and also the loop above are abominations.
They are for goto hypocrits, i.e. people who think that a goto
when it is not named goto but works exactly like a goto is
something better (the Voldemort goto).
The breaks above and in are GOTOS, no point in obfuscating them.
Sorry if I'm a little bit inflammatory about these constructs,
but I have to work with code written by a `do {} while(0)`
champion and I can tell you, it's the horror when you have to
make changes.
It was so bad that I finally used
__attribute__((__cleanup__(x))) gcc extension to implement
something resembling D's scope(exit) so that I'm sure that the
code doesn't leak like it did before.
