On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 09:53:21AM +0000, Dominic Mitchell wrote: > Yuck. I didn't actually look at it, just let the ports compile it for > me.
I didn't inspect it too far, but it seems that the current source is safe to look at. I seems to have benefited from a complete re-write > When it comes to bad C source code though, I don't think I've been more > offended by anything other than procmail. It was (last I looked) a > rats nest of gotos and other horrors. Hmmm, I've just had a look and > it's still remarkably unpleasant to wade through. At the risk of going off topic, the Perl 5 source isn't exactly pleasant. And contains gotos. IIRC I added 2 between 5.6.0 and 5.8.0, but the alternative was a big mess of if()s and braces. C doesn't have all the nice loop labelling features of a certain other language. Parrot has much cleaner source than Perl 5. However, to maintain the balance of good and evil^Wgoto, Perl 6 will compile down to parrot bytecode, which quite definitely does have gotos. So even the nicest, most clean award winning code from the purest best intentioned authors will be automatically corrupted by the Perl 6 compiler. (Eventually.) Nicholas Clark
