Author: Johan de Koning
Date: 02:00:48 11/01/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 31, 2003 at 10:27:00, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On October 31, 2003 at 01:36:17, Johan de Koning wrote: > >>On October 30, 2003 at 09:44:48, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On October 29, 2003 at 13:39:03, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>>It's like saying using 'goto' is ok in a programming environment. Where this is >>>>certainly true, it should not be a policy to do so :) >>> >>>Eh? _every_ program you write has goto's. (aka jumps). They are not >>>bad. In fact, they are _unavoidable_. >> >>OT1: They *are* avoidable. >>Any finite algorithm that does not depend on mid-execution input (typically >>time) can be written as 1 single expression. It would of course be huge and >>run rather slowly without quantum computing. > >I don't know how you can possibly encode a loop into a complex expression, >not knowing beforehand how many loop iterations will be needed... By expanding all possibilities. E.g. part of the WKinCheck subexpression might look like: ( X[e1] == WK & ( (X[f2] == BB | X[f2] == BQ) | (X[f2] == NOP & (X[g3] == BB | X[g3] == BQ)) | (X[f2] == NOP & X[g3] == NOP & (X[h4] == BB | X[h4] == BQ)) | d2, c3, etc, etc ) ) | ( X[f1] == WK etc ) etc I did say *huge*, didn't I ? :-) >>OT2: You *know* what he means. >>There's no need to remove the quotes around 'goto' and change the subject, >>just to contradict. > >I happen to be one of those that believes "gotos are _not_ a bad thing." >Yes, it is possible to "hide" them within the semantics of a programming >language. "break" comes to mind, as does "continue" (both in C of course.) >But they _are_ gotos. They are implemented as jumps. The only advantage to >using them is that they give you a hint as to where the goto is going, without >your having to look for a label, when reading source. But to say that there >are no gotos is simply wrong. It looks like a goto. It smells like a goto. >It acts like a goto. It just isn't spelled "goto". I'm afraid everyone agrees on the use of the *keyword* goto. Whether you like it or not. >>BTW: this isn't personal. >>In fact I'd advice *everyone* not to contradict Vincent. >>That would halve the posting volume, i.e. raising the signal/noise by 6 dB. :-) > >If noone contradicts him, the incredible amount of disinformation he produces >will cause at least beginners to make bad mistakes. If they only believe 1% of >the disinformation he produces, that is a significant number of errors that >they will have to deal with. I think the onus is on everyone to try to stamp >out such errors, when possible. IE that's what a university is all about. If it's dangerous *and* well disguised, a contradiction might actually add to the signal. But all other (= most) cases can safely be left as an exercise for the reader. After all, university is about thinking. ... Johan
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.