Search Results

Search found 938 results on 38 pages for 'goto'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 1/38 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • decent use-case for goto in c?

    - by Robz
    I really hesitate to ask this, because I don't want to "solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion" but I'm new to C and want to gain more insight into common patterns used in the language. I recently heard some distaste for the goto command, but I've also recently found a decent use-case for it. Code like this: error = function_that_could_fail_1(); if (!error) { error = function_that_could_fail_2(); if (!error) { error = function_that_could_fail_3(); ...to the n-th tab level! } else { // deal with error, clean up, and return error code } } else { // deal with error, clean up, and return error code } If the clean-up part is all very similar, could be written a little prettier (my opinion?) like this: error = function_that_could_fail_1(); if(error) { goto cleanup; } error = function_that_could_fail_2(); if(error) { goto cleanup; } error = function_that_could_fail_3(); if(error) { goto cleanup; } ... cleanup: // deal with error if it exists, clean up // return error code Is this a common or acceptable use-case of goto in C? Is there a different/better way to do this?

    Read the article

  • Is goto to improve DRY-ness OK?

    - by Marco Scannadinari
    My code has many checks to detect errors in various cases (many conditions would result in the same error), inside a function returning an error struct. Instead of looking like this: err_struct myfunc(...) { err_struct error = { .error = false }; ... if(something) { error.error = true; error.description = "invalid input"; return error; } ... case 1024: error.error = true; error.description = "invalid input"; // same error, but different detection scenario return error; break; // don't comment on this break please (EDIT: pun unintended) ... Is use of goto in the following context considered better than the previous example? err_struct myfunc(...) { err_struct error = { .error = false }; ... if(something) goto invalid_input; ... case 1024: goto invalid_input; break; return error; invalid_input: error.error = true; error.description = "invalid input"; return error;

    Read the article

  • Goto for the Java Programming Language

    - by darcy
    Work on JDK 8 is well-underway, but we thought this late-breaking JEP for another language change for the platform couldn't wait another day before being published. Title: Goto for the Java Programming Language Author: Joseph D. Darcy Organization: Oracle. Created: 2012/04/01 Type: Feature State: Funded Exposure: Open Component: core/lang Scope: SE JSR: 901 MR Discussion: compiler dash dev at openjdk dot java dot net Start: 2012/Q2 Effort: XS Duration: S Template: 1.0 Reviewed-by: Duke Endorsed-by: Edsger Dijkstra Funded-by: Blue Sun Corporation Summary Provide the benefits of the time-testing goto control structure to Java programs. The Java language has a history of adding new control structures over time, the assert statement in 1.4, the enhanced for-loop in 1.5,and try-with-resources in 7. Having support for goto is long-overdue and simple to implement since the JVM already has goto instructions. Success Metrics The goto statement will allow inefficient and verbose recursive algorithms and explicit loops to be replaced with more compact code. The effort will be a success if at least twenty five percent of the JDK's explicit loops are replaced with goto's. Coordination with IDE vendors is expected to help facilitate this goal. Motivation The goto construct offers numerous benefits to the Java platform, from increased expressiveness, to more compact code, to providing new programming paradigms to appeal to a broader demographic. In JDK 8, there is a renewed focus on using the Java platform on embedded devices with more modest resources than desktop or server environments. In such contexts, static and dynamic memory footprint is a concern. One significant component of footprint is the code attribute of class files and certain classes of important algorithms can be expressed more compactly using goto than using other constructs, saving footprint. For example, to implement state machines recursively, some parties have asked for the JVM to support tail calls, that is, to perform a complex transformation with security implications to turn a method call into a goto. Such complicated machinery should not be assumed for an embedded context. A better solution is just to expose to the programmer the desired functionality, goto. The web has familiarized users with a model of traversing links among different HTML pages in a free-form fashion with some state being maintained on the side, such as login credentials, to effect behavior. This is exactly the programming model of goto and code. While in the past this has been derided as leading to "spaghetti code," spaghetti is a tasty and nutritious meal for programmers, unlike quiche. The invokedynamic instruction added by JSR 292 exposes the JVM's linkage operation to programmers. This is a low-level operation that can be leveraged by sophisticated programmers. Likewise, goto is a also a low-level operation that should not be hidden from programmers who can use more efficient idioms. Some may object that goto was consciously excluded from the original design of Java as one of the removed feature from C and C++. However, the designers of the Java programming languages have revisited these removals before. The enum construct was also left out only to be added in JDK 5 and multiple inheritance was left out, only to be added back by the virtual extension method methods of Project Lambda. As a living language, the needs of the growing Java community today should be used to judge what features are needed in the platform tomorrow; the language should not be forever bound by the decisions of the past. Description From its initial version, the JVM has had two instructions for unconditional transfer of control within a method, goto (0xa7) and goto_w (0xc8). The goto_w instruction is used for larger jumps. All versions of the Java language have supported labeled statements; however, only the break and continue statements were able to specify a particular label as a target with the onerous restriction that the label must be lexically enclosing. The grammar addition for the goto statement is: GotoStatement: goto Identifier ; The new goto statement similar to break except that the target label can be anywhere inside the method and the identifier is mandatory. The compiler simply translates the goto statement into one of the JVM goto instructions targeting the right offset in the method. Therefore, adding the goto statement to the platform is only a small effort since existing compiler and JVM functionality is reused. Other language changes to support goto include obvious updates to definite assignment analysis, reachability analysis, and exception analysis. Possible future extensions include a computed goto as found in gcc, which would replace the identifier in the goto statement with an expression having the type of a label. Testing Since goto will be implemented using largely existing facilities, only light levels of testing are needed. Impact Compatibility: Since goto is already a keyword, there are no source compatibility implications. Performance/scalability: Performance will improve with more compact code. JVMs already need to handle irreducible flow graphs since goto is a VM instruction.

    Read the article

  • Do we still have a case against the goto statement? [closed]

    - by FredOverflow
    Possible Duplicate: Is it ever worthwhile using goto? In a recent article, Andrew Koenig writes: When asked why goto statements are harmful, most programmers will say something like "because they make programs hard to understand." Press harder, and you may well hear something like "I don't really know, but that's what I was taught." For that reason, I'd like to summarize Dijkstra's arguments. He then shows two program fragments, one without a goto and and one with a goto: if (n < 0) n = 0; Assuming that n is a variable of a built-in numeric type, we know that after this code, n is nonnegative. Suppose we rewrite this fragment: if (n >= 0) goto nonneg; n = 0; nonneg: ; In theory, this rewrite should have the same effect as the original. However, rewriting has changed something important: It has opened the possibility of transferring control to nonneg from anywhere else in the program. I emphasized the part that I don't agree with. Modern languages like C++ do not allow goto to transfer control arbitrarily. Here are two examples: You cannot jump to a label that is defined in a different function. You cannot jump over a variable initialization. Now consider composing your code of tiny functions that adhere to the single responsibility principle: int clamp_to_zero(int n) { if (n >= 0) goto n_is_not_negative: n = 0; n_is_not_negative: return n; } The classic argument against the goto statement is that control could have transferred from anywhere inside your program to the label n_is_not_negative, but this simply is not (and was never) true in C++. If you try it, you will get a compiler error, because labels are scoped. The rest of the program doesn't even see the name n_is_not_negative, so it's just not possible to jump there. This is a static guarantee! Now, I'm not saying that this version is better then the one without the goto, but to make the latter as expressive as the first one, we would at least have to insert a comment, or even better yet, an assertion: int clamp_to_zero(int n) { if (n < 0) n = 0; // n is not negative at this point assert(n >= 0); return n; } Note that you basically get the assertion for free in the goto version, because the condition n >= 0 is already written in line 1, and n = 0; satisfies the condition trivially. But that's just a random observation. It seems to me that "don't use gotos!" is one of those dogmas like "don't use multiple returns!" that stem from a time where the real problem were functions of hundreds or even thousand of lines of code. So, do we still have a case against the goto statement, other than that it is not particularly useful? I haven't written a goto in at least a decade, but it's not like I was running away in terror whenever I encountered one. 1 Ideally, I would like to see a strong and valid argument against gotos that still holds when you adhere to established programming principles for clean code like the SRP. "You can jump anywhere" is not (and has never been) a valid argument in C++, and somehow I don't like teaching stuff that is not true. 1: Also, I have never been able to resurrect even a single velociraptor, no matter how many gotos I tried :(

    Read the article

  • Does anyone have a good example/sample of "goto" spaghetti code? [closed]

    - by ArtB
    I've read a lot about how GoTo was considered harmful and removed for other control structures that were more intuitive. Does anyone have a good example / sample of goto spaghetti code? Preferrably, the sample code should be difficult to follow, but realtively easy when rewritten into more conventional control structures. I know I could try to write you some of my own, but I've never really used goto and don't think I could due justice to the headaches its abuse can lead to. I want this for didactic purposes to train junior developers on what to avoid. Mainly, to point to illustrate how OOP is taking the same idea to next logical consequence. EDIT: by good example I mean code that is terrible to read and abuses it, rather than code that uses goto for reasonable optimization

    Read the article

  • Is this a decent use-case for goto in C?

    - by Robz
    I really hesitate to ask this, because I don't want to "solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion" but I'm new to C and want to gain more insight into common patterns used in the language. I recently heard some distaste for the goto command, but I've also recently found a decent use-case for it. Code like this: error = function_that_could_fail_1(); if (!error) { error = function_that_could_fail_2(); if (!error) { error = function_that_could_fail_3(); ...to the n-th tab level! } else { // deal with error, clean up, and return error code } } else { // deal with error, clean up, and return error code } If the clean-up part is all very similar, could be written a little prettier (my opinion?) like this: error = function_that_could_fail_1(); if(error) { goto cleanup; } error = function_that_could_fail_2(); if(error) { goto cleanup; } error = function_that_could_fail_3(); if(error) { goto cleanup; } ... cleanup: // deal with error if it exists, clean up // return error code Is this a common or acceptable use-case of goto in C? Is there a different/better way to do this?

    Read the article

  • GOTO still considered harmful?

    - by Kyle Cronin
    Everyone is aware of Dijkstra's Letters to the editor: go to statement considered harmful (also here .html transcript and here .pdf) and there has been a formidable push since that time to eschew the goto statement whenever possible. While it's possible to use goto to produce unmaintainable, sprawling code, it nevertheless remains in modern programming languages. Even the advanced continuation control structure in Scheme can be described as a sophisticated goto. What circumstances warrant the use of goto? When is it best to avoid? As a followup question: C provides a pair of functions, setjmp and longjmp, that provide the ability to goto not just within the current stack frame but within any of the calling frames. Should these be considered as dangerous as goto? More dangerous? Dijkstra himself regretted that title, of which he was not responsible for. At the end of EWD1308 (also here .pdf) he wrote: Finally a short story for the record. In 1968, the Communications of the ACM published a text of mine under the title "The goto statement considered harmful", which in later years would be most frequently referenced, regrettably, however, often by authors who had seen no more of it than its title, which became a cornerstone of my fame by becoming a template: we would see all sorts of articles under the title "X considered harmful" for almost any X, including one titled "Dijkstra considered harmful". But what had happened? I had submitted a paper under the title "A case against the goto statement", which, in order to speed up its publication, the editor had changed into a "letter to the Editor", and in the process he had given it a new title of his own invention! The editor was Niklaus Wirth. A well thought out classic paper about this topic, to be matched to that of Dijkstra, is Structured Programming with go to Statements (also here .pdf), by Donald E. Knuth. Reading both helps to reestablish context and a non-dogmatic understanding of the subject. In this paper, Dijkstra's opinion on this case is reported and is even more strong: Donald E. Knuth: I believe that by presenting such a view I am not in fact disagreeing sharply with Dijkstra's ideas, since he recently wrote the following: "Please don't fall into the trap of believing that I am terribly dogmatical about [the go to statement]. I have the uncomfortable feeling that others are making a religion out of it, as if the conceptual problems of programming could be solved by a single trick, by a simple form of coding discipline!"

    Read the article

  • A problem with conky in Gnome 3.4 [closed]

    - by Pranit Bauva
    Possible Duplicate: Conky not working in Gnome 3.4 My conky in Gnome 3.4 is not working. When I run a conky script nothing appears but the process is running. Please also see the debug code : pungi-man@pungi-man:~$ sh conky_startup.sh Conky: forked to background, pid is 3157 Conky: desktop window (c00023) is subwindow of root window (aa) Conky: window type - override Conky: drawing to created window (0x2200001) Conky: drawing to double buffer My conky script is : background yes update_interval 1 cpu_avg_samples 2 net_avg_samples 2 temperature_unit celsius double_buffer yes no_buffers yes text_buffer_size 2048 gap_x 10 gap_y 30 minimum_size 190 450 maximum_width 190 own_window yes own_window_type override own_window_transparent yes own_window_hints undecorate,sticky,skip_taskbar,skip_pager,below border_inner_margin 0 border_outer_margin 0 alignment tr draw_shades no draw_outline no draw_borders no draw_graph_borders no override_utf8_locale yes use_xft yes xftfont caviar dreams:size=8 xftalpha 0.5 uppercase no default_color FFFFFF color1 DDDDDD color2 AAAAAA color3 888888 color4 666666 lua_load /home/pungi-man/.conky/conky_grey.lua lua_draw_hook_post main TEXT ${voffset 35} ${goto 95}${color4}${font ubuntu:size=22}${time %e}${color1}${offset -50}${font ubuntu:size=10}${time %A} ${goto 85}${color2}${voffset -2}${font ubuntu:size=9}${time %b}${voffset -2} ${color3}${font ubuntu:size=12}${time %Y}${font} ${voffset 80} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:bold}${color}CPU ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${top name 1}${alignr}${top cpu 1}% ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color2}${top name 2}${alignr}${top cpu 2}% ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color3}${top name 3}${alignr}${top cpu 3}% ${goto 90}${cpugraph 10,100 666666 666666} ${goto 90}${voffset -10}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color}${threads} process ${voffset 20} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:bold}${color}MEM ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${top_mem name 1} ${alignr}${top_mem mem 1}% ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color2}${top_mem name 2} ${alignr}${top_mem mem 2}% ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color3}${top_mem name 3} ${alignr}${top_mem mem 3}% ${voffset 15} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:bold}${color}DISKS ${goto 90}${diskiograph 30,100 666666 666666}${voffset -30} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color}used: ${fs_used /home} /home ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color}used: ${fs_used /} / ${voffset 10} ${goto 70}${font Ubuntu:size=18,weight:bold}${color3}NET${alignr}${color2}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:bold}${color1}${if_up eth0}eth ${addr eth0} ${endif}${if_up wlan0}wifi ${addr wlan0}${endif} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:bold}${color}open ports: ${alignr}${color2}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 count} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:bold}${color}${offset 10}IP${alignr}DPORT ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 0}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 0} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 1}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 1} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 2}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 2} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 3}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 3} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 4}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 4} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 5}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 5} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 6}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 6} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 7}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 7} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 8}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 8} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 9}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 9} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 10}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 10} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 11}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 11} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 12}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 12} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 13}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 13} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 14}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 14} This script works fine with unity but faces problems in gnome 3.4 Can anyone please sort it out?

    Read the article

  • c99 goto past initialization

    - by R Samuel Klatchko
    While debugging a crash, I came across this issue in some code: int func() { char *p1 = malloc(...); if (p1 == NULL) goto err_exit; char *p2 = malloc(...); if (p2 == NULL) goto err_exit; ... err_exit: free(p2); free(p1); return -1; } The problem occurs when the first malloc fails. Because we jump across the initialization of p2, it contains random data and the call to free(p2) can crash. I would expect/hope that this would be treated the same way as in C++ where the compiler does not allow a goto to jump across an initialization. My question: is jumping across an initialization allowed by the standard or is this a bug in gcc's implementation of c99?

    Read the article

  • GoTo statements and alternatives in VB.NET

    - by qais
    I've posted a code snippet on another forum asking for help and people pointed out to me that using GoTo statements is very bad programming practice. I'm wondering: why is it bad? What alternatives to GoTo are there to use in VB.NET that would be considered generally more of a better practice? Consider this snippet below where the user has to input their date of birth. If the month/date/year are invalid or unrealistic(using if statements checking the integer inputs size, if there's a better way to do this, I'd appreciate if you could tell me that also :D) How would I be able to loop back to ask the user again? retryday: Console.WriteLine("Please enter the day you were born : ") day = Console.ReadLine If day > 31 Or day < 1 Then Console.WriteLine("Please enter a valid day") GoTo retryday End If

    Read the article

  • Any valid use of goto in PHP?

    - by nikic
    I know, there are other questions about the goto statement introduced in PHP 5.3. But I couldn't find any decent answer in there, all were of the type "last resort", "xkcd", "evil", "bad", "EVIL!!!". But no valid example. Only statements that there aren't any uses. Or statements that there are some rare use cases (again, without examples). So, the question is: "Which are the valid uses of goto in PHP". Answers for "Is goto evil" are not welcome and will get downvoted. Thanks :) Or does somebody have a link to an RFC where the decision is explained - I couldn't find one.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2008: CASE vs IF-ELSE-IF vs GOTO

    - by Saharsh Shah
    I have some rules in my application and I have written the business logic of that rules in my procedure. At the time of creation of procedure I came to know that CASE statement won't work in my scenario. So I have tried two ways to perform same operations (using IF-ELSE-IF or GOTO) shown as below. Method 1 Using IF-ELSE-IF conditions: DECLARE @V_RuleId SMALLINT; IF (@V_RuleId = 1) BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END ELSE IF (@V_RuleId = 2) BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END ELSE IF (@V_RuleId = 3) BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END /* ... ... ... ...*/ ELSE IF (@V_RuleId = 19) BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END ELSE IF (@V_RuleId = 20) BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END Method 2 Using GOTO statement: DECLARE @V_RuleId SMALLINT, @V_Temp VARCHAR(100); SET @V_Temp = 'GOTO RULE' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @V_RuleId); EXECUTE sp_executesql @V_Temp; RULE1: BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END RULE2: BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END RULE3: BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END /* ... ... ... ...*/ RULE19: BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END RULE20: BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END Today I have 20 rules. It can be increase to any number in future. If I can able to use CASE statement then I have not any problem with performance, but I can't do that so I am worried about the performance of my procedure. Also one thing to be noticed that this procedure will execute very frequently by application. My questions are: Is there any way to use CASE statement in my procedure? If not, which method is best to use in my procedure to improve the performance of my code? Thanks in advance...

    Read the article

  • GoTo statements, and alternatives (help me please im new) (VB.net)

    - by qais
    Basically I posted a code snippet on a forum asking for help and people pointed out to me that using GoTo statements is very bad programming practise so I'm just wondering, why is it bad? And also what alternative is there to use, like for example in this program ive done for homework the user has to input their date of birth and if the month/date/year are invalid or unrealistic(using if statements checking the integer inputs size, if theres any better way to do this i'd appreciate if you could tell me that also :D) then how would i be able to loop back to ask them again? heres a little extract of my code retryday: Console.WriteLine("Please enter the day you were born : ") day = Console.ReadLine If day > 31 Or day < 1 Then Console.WriteLine("Please enter a valid day") GoTo retryday End If

    Read the article

  • goto statements in java

    - by user238284
    I executed the below code in Eclipse, but the GOTO statements in it is not effective. How to use it? case 2: **outsideloops:** System.out.println("Enter the marks (in 100):"); System.out.println("Subject 1:"); float sub1=Float.parseFloat(br.readLine()); **if(sub1<=101) goto outsideloops;** System.out.println("Subject 2:"); float sub2=Float.parseFloat(br.readLine()); System.out.println("Subject 3:"); float sub3=Float.parseFloat(br.readLine()); System.out.println("The Student is "+stu.average(sub1,sub2,sub3)+ "in the examinations"); break;

    Read the article

  • Is GOTO really as evil as we are led to believe?

    - by RoboShop
    I'm a young programmer, so all my working life I've been told GOTO is evil, don't use it, if you do, your first born son will die. Recently, I've realized that GOTO actually still exists in .NET and I was wondering, is GOTO really as bad as they say, or is it just because everyone says you shouldn't use it, so that's why you don't. I know GOTO can be used badly, but are there any legit situations where you may possibly use it. The only thing I can think of is maybe to use GOTO to break out of a bunch of nested loops. I reckon that might be better then having to "break" out of each of them but because GOTO is supposedly always bad, I would never use it and it would probably never pass a peer review. What are your views? Is GOTO always bad? Can it sometimes be good? Has anyone here actually been gutsy enough to use GOTO for a real life system?

    Read the article

  • What happens when we combine RAII and GOTO ?

    - by Robert Gould
    I'm wondering, for no other purpose than pure curiosity (because no one SHOULD EVER write code like this!) about how the behavior of RAII meshes with the use of Goto (lovely idea isn't it). class Two { public: ~Two() { printf("2,"); } }; class Ghost { public: ~Ghost() { printf(" BOO! "); } }; void foo() { { Two t; printf("1,"); goto JUMP; } Ghost g; JUMP: printf("3"); } int main() { foo(); } When running the following code in VS2005 I get the following output: 1,2,3 BOO! However I imagined, guessed, hoped that 'BOO!' wouldn't actually appear as the Ghost should have never been instantiated (IMHO, because I don't know the actual expected behavior of this code). Any Guru out there knows what's up? Just realized that if I instantiate an explicit constructor for Ghost the code doesn't compile... class Ghost { public: Ghost() { printf(" HAHAHA! "); } ~Ghost() { printf(" BOO! "); } }; Ah, the mystery ...

    Read the article

  • Is there a goto statement in java?

    - by Venkats
    I'm confused about this. Most of us have been told that there is no goto statement in Java. But I found that it is one of the keyword in Java. Where can it be used? If it can not be used, then why was it included in Java as a keyword?

    Read the article

  • Language construct naming: Function/Goto

    - by sub
    How is a language construct with the following properties called? It has a beginning and an end, just like a function It has a header containing it's name, also like a function but without arguments There can be any number of statements between its beginning and end, like a function You can use a function to jump to its beginning from anywhere (even itself) and it will execute the statements contained in it until it reaches its end You can use a function to immediately stop the execution of its contents and jump back where it was called from The code it contains is in the same scope as everything else, so you can access all variables outside and create new ones which aren't deleted upon leaving the construct. All in all it is like a goto point with an end and the option to return where it was called from.

    Read the article

  • Batch script crashing

    - by TamirGali
    My Batch script keeps crashing with the note: "set was unexpected at this time" which I could only see via video recording and checking frame by frame. here is the script: @echo off color 6f set min=0 set max=25 goto REDIR :REDIR set var=0 goto TOP :TOP cls set /a var=%var%+1 set /a rand%var%=%random% %% (max - min + 1)+ min if %rand2%==%rand1% set var=0&goto TOP if %rand3%==%rand2% set var=1&goto TOP if %rand4%==%rand3% set var=2&goto TOP if %rand5%==%rand4% set var=3&oto TOP if %rand6%==%rand5% set var=4&goto TOP if %rand7%==%rand6% set var=5&goto TOP if %rand8%==%rand7% set var=6&goto TOP if %rand9%==%rand8% set var=7&goto TOP if %rand10%==%rand9% set var=8&goto TOP if %rand11%==%rand10% set var=9&goto TOP if %rand12%==%rand11% set var=10&goto TOP if %rand13%==%rand12% set var=11&goto TOP if %rand14%==%rand13% set var=12&goto TOP if %rand15%==%rand14% set var=13&goto TOP if %rand16%==%rand15% set var=14&goto TOP if %rand17%==%rand16% set var=15&goto TOP if %rand18%==%rand17% set var=16&goto TOP if %rand19%==%rand18% set var=17&goto TOP if %rand20%==%rand19% set var=18&goto TOP if %rand21%==%rand20% set var=19&goto TOP if %rand22%==%rand21% set var=20&goto TOP if %rand23%==%rand22% set var=21&goto TOP if %rand24%==%rand23% set var=22&goto TOP if %rand25%==%rand24% set var=23&goto TOP if %rand26%==%rand25% set var=24&goto TOP if %var%==26 goto SHOW goto TOP :SHOW cls echo A=%rand1% echo B=%rand2% echo C=%rand3% echo D=%rand4% echo E=%rand5% echo F=%rand6% echo G=%rand7% echo H=%rand8% echo I=%rand9% echo J=%rand10% echo K=%rand11% echo L=%rand12% echo M=%rand13% echo N=%rand14% echo O=%rand15% echo P=%rand16% echo Q=%rand17% echo R=%rand18% echo S=%rand19% echo T=%rand20% echo U=%rand21% echo V=%rand22% echo W=%rand23% echo X=%rand24% echo Y=%rand25% echo Z=%rand26% pause goto REDIR

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >