Quote:Original post by aleksi1578
Well should i use goto or what to go to another place in the program?
Quote:Original post by aleksi1578
Well I program in C++/C.. Please can you tell some other ways than goto? or any tutorials that has some of them/all of them?
Quote:Original post by Extrarius
Sorry but because its code for work I can't post the actual code, and I dont think I could really retype an example without violating all those contracts you have to sign to be a programmer for hire =-/
Quote:Anyways, like I said, coding standards require each class to have its own files, which means that no, I couldn't do as you've demonstrated.
Quote:Thus, the vital part of a member function of class A has to be cut out and putt in a_loop_wrapper's file. Sure code division is a good thing, but those loops basically were the meat of the original function (so instead of func loops return, its now func a_loop_wrapper() return) AND returns are only allowed at the end of functions
template<typename _RandomAccessIter, typename _Predicate> _RandomAccessIter find_if(_RandomAccessIter __first, _RandomAccessIter __last, _Predicate __pred, random_access_iterator_tag) { typename iterator_traits<_RandomAccessIter>::difference_type __trip_count = (__last - __first) >> 2; for ( ; __trip_count > 0 ; --__trip_count) { if (__pred(*__first)) return __first; ++__first; if (__pred(*__first)) return __first; ++__first; if (__pred(*__first)) return __first; ++__first; if (__pred(*__first)) return __first; ++__first; } switch(__last - __first) { case 3: if (__pred(*__first)) return __first; ++__first; case 2: if (__pred(*__first)) return __first; ++__first; case 1: if (__pred(*__first)) return __first; ++__first; case 0: default: return __last; } }Quote:Original post by MaulingMonkeyQuote:Original post by Extrarius
Sorry but because its code for work I can't post the actual code, and I dont think I could really retype an example without violating all those contracts you have to sign to be a programmer for hire =-/
Gotchya. Think you can give a basic description of what it did? E.g. something like "resorted patient records by name"?Quote:Anyways, like I said, coding standards require each class to have its own files, which means that no, I couldn't do as you've demonstrated.
Oh, I thought you were talking about the C++ standard (it's "the" standard in my mind), not work-specific standard. I tend to have each class in it's own header because it allows for quick reuse if that becomes desireable, but for foo_problem like positions I think it's a silly requirement to follow blindly. I'd fault the coding standard for that problem, not the code :-).Quote:Thus, the vital part of a member function of class A has to be cut out and putt in a_loop_wrapper's file. Sure code division is a good thing, but those loops basically were the meat of the original function (so instead of func loops return, its now func a_loop_wrapper() return) AND returns are only allowed at the end of functions
Another very silly rule IMHO. Who am I to say? Better question: Who is the implementators (sp?) of the standard library on my linux box to say? Whoever they are, they seem to agree with me:
*** Source Snippet Removed ***
Rules are made to be broken I allways say :-).
Quote:Original post by Extrarius
Basically the code involved comparing answers given by a person taking a test to the answers specified by a teacher, but there were many aspects to each answer (ie not simple multiple choice) and each had various tolerances depending on other aspects of the answers. It was a rather complicated grading system to put it simply (the company is a contractor, and it was required by the contract), and the function in question was the comparison part. The goto didn't actually break out of all the loops, just the innermost 3 iirc (it's been a while since I worked on this part of the project), but still goto was a much better solution than what was required by the company standards.
Quote:Personally, I find all of the standard rather silly
Quote:Original post by Anonymous Poster
OMG!! You actually put the 'return' statements on the same line as their 'if'
statement!!!!! Truely EVIL!!!
Quote:Anyway I must not be the only one who thinks that having as much real code visible as possible on our pittifully small screens is a good thing.
(Oh for the old days with the fanfold paper printouts.)
Quote:Original post by MaulingMonkeyExcept of course, that the gotos are the first thing ruled out by the standard. Personally, I think goto is cleanest of all solutions since you get to leave everything in a single coherent function.
[...]Sounds like we're on the same page then. If you've got an enforced standard tying your arms behind your back, then gotos may indeed be the best solution.
Quote:Original post by ExtrariusQuote:Original post by MaulingMonkeyExcept of course, that the gotos are the first thing ruled out by the standard.
[...]Sounds like we're on the same page then. If you've got an enforced standard tying your arms behind your back, then gotos may indeed be the best solution.
Quote:Original post by ExtrariusI don't care where you work, if I were you I would blatantly disregard those rules because they were written by someone with a case of 'rectal cranial inversion'. If I read a standard like that I would just laugh my head off and then just go and write some proper code as if I never saw it. I kid you not![lol]
Personally, I find all of the standard rather silly (such as 80 chars max when the project requires us all to run at at least 1280 by something, only return at end of function, no continue/break/goto, custom hungarian-like naming convention, must refactor all functions that score a 'complexity rating' higher than a certain number with some code audit tool until they come out low enough {and it basically checks the number of branches, which have to be massively increased because of the 80 char line limit and no return rule functions are basically just if(!bfail){} if(!bfail){} etc over and over to avoid indentation), must use at least two characters in variable names because apparenly ide's can't search for identifiers only or something)
Quote:Original post by ExtrariusI bet you that it costs more too [wink].
Production code can get REALLY messy when you impose stupid limitations such as no goto/break/continue/returns(except for returns at the end of a function). It requires hideous code twice as long to avoid them, or code 10+ times as long(that takes 50 times as long to design) to make readable code that avoids them.
