X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Virus-Scanned:	amavisd-new at neurotica.com
X-NSA-prism-xkeyscore:	I do not consent to surveillance, prick
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=neurotica.com;
	s=default; t=1444112834;
	bh=vnM4PQrk9xLa4+bxPx0rrXPE/CK4iTDYeydDqEkZzmw=;
	h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To;
	b=Bsd1kpnr7NmkdoaNxvKz1rPz174aBlP0Flrgvk4flGCN5Jif2N/6iay7qDBVoImvR
	auKG3Ec07QXJJqOLI493Vhs72Ev/FX4KvCQn4rys9KPPm/VTyPmNDV/hFZeWRzBSkN
	D/+aL4MuHDS0/6QR6UEM0mntZX/tD6GbmzMxqXls=
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] GTK3, Glade interface designer (router, auto?)
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References:	<20151003210701 DOT de392b925f54dadb0a5fedd8 AT gmail DOT com>
	<1443903758 DOT 1873 DOT 13 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <56104A0A DOT 9020507 AT xs4all DOT nl>
	<1443909591 DOT 1873 DOT 18 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de>
	<CAC4O8c_g7e562Gaotrbi6gLfjP6cJU1ys=MtEkDE7bSh4F9dfg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<1443975731 DOT 671 DOT 52 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de>
	<20151004191717 DOT bf8223417541a9306bfbd9ea AT gmail DOT com>
	<CAC4O8c9Bi5HJfcW6wUgm_+4O2gs4vDdBMbS2hF_0dCqnBuJahQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<1443997480 DOT 2068 DOT 32 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de>
	<CAC4O8c-bnGky=Nab59-pOTJkB8Q9Tc5t5hqE+dnEF-777hUjMg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<1444070851 DOT 1014 DOT 20 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <muv4ua$hat$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1510060356440 DOT 7137 AT igor2priv>
	<56133047 DOT 7030402 AT neurotica DOT com>
	<CAM2RGhTw5QMLxLUOcALG1dubTaVkzA+VGxz2x376JB-Mg186RA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<56133B15 DOT 6020402 AT neurotica DOT com>
	<CAM2RGhRHwpe1MTdgR6q-SLrxK=qRwoj+zb4eS6Ku+x4FKspLDw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<56134243 DOT 3060203 AT neurotica DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1510060601390 DOT 7137 AT igor2priv>
	<56135E15 DOT 6000007 AT neurotica DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1510060747520 DOT 7137 AT igor2priv>
From:	"Dave McGuire (mcguire AT neurotica DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status:	N1110
Message-ID:	<561369C1.1060902@neurotica.com>
Date:	Tue, 6 Oct 2015 02:27:13 -0400
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
	Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1510060747520.7137@igor2priv>
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id t966RMpK030096
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On 10/06/2015 01:52 AM, gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu wrote:
>>>> list in the past several weeks are accomplishing little other than
>>>> proving that there can be no consensus here.
>>>>
>>>>  Personally I treat this a bit like the existence of "goto" in C: It is
>>>> never, ever intended to actually be used in code.  It is a "sign post".
>>>
>>> Do you have any reference on this? I mean a quote from the guys who
>>> actually developed C and added goto in the first place? Or is is just
>>> your guess?
>>
>>  A "reference"?  No, but your attempt to dismiss it as a "guess" will
>> fail.  I hate name-dropping, so I won't drop any names.
>>
>>  It was presented to me as an opinion by a mentor and former employer
>> of mine a long time ago, as he was teaching me the basics of C.  Perhaps
>> we can call that an "educated guess".  ~30 years of C programming later,
>> I've taken that opinion as my own.  Perhaps we can call that an
>> "experienced guess".  So, during this conversation:
>>
>>  http://www.neurotica.com/misc/DSC_0193.JPG
>>
>>  ...I asked "one of the guys who actually developed C" about it and he
>> concurred, with a hearty laugh.
>>
>>  Close enough?
>>
> 
> Nice.

  Actually, no, it wasn't nice at all.  I apologize for doing that; I'm
in a very poor mood tonight and that was below the belt.

> On the other hand I did some search and my impression is, according to
> quotes and books written by those guys, is that they didn't mean goto to
> be never used. They rather meant it used with care. Wikipedia has a nice
> summary on this:
> 
> 'In their quasi-standard book on the C programming language, Dennis
> Ritchie and Brian Kernighan warn that goto is "infinitely abusable", but
> also suggest that it could be used for end-of-function error handlers
> and for multi-level breaks from loops.'

  My opinion differs slightly.  I don't like shortcuts and I'm not a
lazy coder.  Goto is a shortcut that caters to lazy coders.  I get the
point they made above, but I still avoid it, and I still label as
"clueless" the people who don't.

> So my impression is still that you generalize your opinion, this time
> about goto, and imply other people have the same opinion.

  Ah, nice try, and a good interpretation, but that's not the thought
process here.  It's more a matter of just not caring about other
peoples' opinions about such basic things, and trusting my own
experience.  Occasional validation from higher-ups is nice but not
necessary at this point, and sometimes serves as a sanity check, but in
general I know my limitations and I trust myself.  This is not egotism,
it's simple professional confidence borne from experience and knowing
where the dragons lie because I've stumbled in and awakened them a few
times already.

               -Dave

-- 
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA

- Raw text -