Robert Dober wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 9:15 PM, Michael W. Ryder
> <_mwryder / worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>> Robert Klemme wrote:
> 
>>  Coming from a background in computers from the 70's when the language was
>> much closer to the metal I never had any problems with Go To or Jump.  In
>> assembler there is no way to not use Jumps for loops or conditional
>> processing.  Fortran and Basic were much the same way.  I believe Knuth's
>> original works were from this era and of course a lot of his code is in the
>> MIX assembler.
> Very true, but as I have mentioned one has to be disciplined.
>>  I can see the reason to eliminate jumping around in code when possible but
>> think they can sometimes make a program easier to read.  I find it easier to
>> read a program that says "If error goto ERROR" over trying to figure out
>> where a Break command goes.
> Then maybe your methods are too complex, what about refactoring ;)
> Honestly I try to avoid methods with more than 10-12 LOC (I do not
> succeed all the time) but up to 20LOC might be acceptable.
> You really *should* be able to see where the break goes.
> 

Most of my programming is for business use.  A lot of the time the user 
will make an entry and depending on what they enter the program will 
continue or jump to a totally different area.  While it may be possible 
to do with a couple of different entries to eliminate the jumps I don't 
think it makes the code any more readable, and after that it is almost 
impossible.  I did manage something like this in C using a case 
statement to determine what function to call next but Business Basic 
does not have this ability.


> This all said, Knuth's MIX code is for sure easier to read than one of
> my early Ruby methods :(.
> 
> Cheers
> Robert
>>
>>
>>
>>> If you want to read up on the matter, Wikipedia has quite an exhaustive
>> coverage:
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structured_programming
>>>
>>> Kind regards
>>>
>>>    robert
>>>
>>
> 
> 
>