forum.vdsworld.com

[dmonckton]

Hi

A while back I tried to introduce VDS to a close friend who is a professional C++ developer. I was trying to get a bit of cred with him.
He just looked at the code and said "it's crap it still uses GOTO's". I was very deflated and have been trying to hint at how good VDS is ever since.

So I made this skeleton application with out using GOTO's.

Is there any reason why I shouldn't do it this way??

[Garrett]

Your friend will give you the same reaction with that code since it uses GOSUB. Reason being is that he's used to running all his code in the main loop of his programs. Or in our case all code would be in the EVENTLOOP, or in your example the "repeat" loop there.

It is an ancient belief that using GOTO and GOSUB CREATED slower code, and it did, back in the days of 8088's and maybe even 386 computers, back when the CPU was so much slower. But these days, it doesn't matter much, if at all, if you use those now since the computers are so fast that you're not going to notice any sort of speed difference using either method, unless you're getting into millions of lines of code, then, maybe then you might notice a difference.

Here's what he might better relate too here:

[WidgetCoder]

Personally, I like the that VDS is not a highly structured language and that it uses the familiar old DOS branching syntax “GOTO”. I think you will find this technique while looking more non-linear and structured really has no actual advantage. It creates an unnecessary level of nesting for both the REPEAT and GOSUB commands (mem usage).

If you want to test that theory create two identical programs one with the standard goto loop and one with your gosub branching. Compile them, run them both at the same time, and compare their memory usage with task manager. I’m sure the difference will be slight but the gosub branching will use more resources.

[vdsalchemist]

David,
I am a professional programmer. I program in many languages including C/C++. I would simply ask him how he handles error checking or better yet ask him to explain how the C++ compiler handles error checking when the code is actually compiled. C++ is not a structurally sound language and even the creator of C++ said so. Structured programming is only 1 style of programming that can be applied to any language. Using goto's in a scripting language is ok as long as you use a top down approach and always return back to where the original call was made. Also ask him that if you are not supposed to use a goto then why does C++ still offer the goto statement. Normally it should be used for speed and if there is no other way to accomplish what you want to. For him to totally over look another programming language because it has the goto statement is pretty narrow minded and the fact that he claims to be a C++ programmer and does not realize that C++ has a goto statement as well is just sad. One should never think that only 1 language is the best of all languages and even the creator of C++ will not make such a bold statement as to say that C++ is the end all of all programming languages. Challenge this C++ programmer. Ask him how many lines of code would it take him to build a program that does exactly what the code I am showing below. The code below follows Structural top down programming standards. Most class based languages are not Structurally sound due to polymorphisms. For that matter C++ is actually less structural than VDS since C++ uses mostly compiler directives and MACROS from header files. Goto or no Goto; a purely procedural language like VDS can be easily programmed in a structural form.

[ShinobiSoft]