Re: Programming skills required by mathematicians?

On 4 Jul, 21:50, Marshall <marshall.spi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Jul 4, 1:16 pm, ju...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
> > On 4 Jul, 20:34, Marshall <marshall.spi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > On Jul 4, 11:55 am, goto <g...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > Frederick Williams wrote:
>
> > > > > > I think nowadays nobody, except Herman, will argue in favour
of=
 gotos.
>
> > > > > There are common enough situations in which the goto is the
clear=
est
> > > > > thing to use, so why wouldn't one use it?
>
> > > > The principal objectioneers always were the academic airheads,
thos=
e who
> > > > never wrote or imagined a real life program larger than a dozen
lin=
es.
> > > > Other than that,
>
> > > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 "If you want to go somewhere, goto is the best way
=
to get there."
>
> > > Snort.
>
> > > This was a fierce argument in the 1970s. Your side lost.
>
> > That it lost doesn't necessarily mean it was wrong.
>
> That the debate was settled decades ago and there
> has been no meaningful question about it since is
> a very, very strong indication that it was, in fact,
> utterly wrong.


The debate has never been settled. It's rather become a niche thing.


>
> > Statistics on software projects' failures anyone?
>
> So you blame the high rate of software project failures
> on insufficient use of gotos, then? Remarkable.


I blame that there is a rule where there should be an understanding.
That's where the detractors of gotos are just clueless, and that's
where the software industry has fallen to the knees.


>
> > IMO, today's higher level programming languages, the ones actually
> > used in the software industry I mean, mainly suffer of being hybrids
> > between the conceptual and the technical domains.
>
> You should say more stuff like this and less stuff about gotos.


Have no idea what you mean. :)

-LV


>
> Marshall