[Info-vax] DCL's flaws (both scripting and UI)

[Bill Gunshannon]

In article <c3d41ef0-2018-4392-a538-e735baa7237a at googlegroups.com>,
	mcleanjoh at gmail.com writes:
> On Friday, January 23, 2015 at 8:24:04 AM UTC+11, mcle... at gmail.com wrote:
>> On Friday, January 23, 2015 at 1:17:40 AM UTC+11, Bob Koehler wrote:
>> > In article <m9pdk1$cqh$1 at dont-email.me>, David Froble <davef at tsoft-inc.com> writes:
>> > > 
>> > > I haven't really considered the calls for looping capability.  Perhaps 
>> > > because I do looping in DCL frequently.
>> > > 
>> > > Is the problem that there is no formalized looping commands?
>> > 
>> >    The problem is the large number of programmers I've worked with
>> >    who insist that there is no "goto" in C.
>> 
>> It's just simpler and usually clearer to write chunks of DCL that don't have something like
>> 
>> 
>> LAB$:
> 
> I don't know what happened ... I thought I hit Shift N ...
> 
> It's just simpler and usually clearer to write Loops (FOR, WHILE, DO) instead of chunks of DCL that don't have something like ...
> 
>   N = 1
> LAB_10:
>   N = N + 1
>   IF (N.GE.X) THEN GOTO END_LOOP
>    :
>    :
>   GOTO LAB10
> END_LOOP:
> 

Dykstra is turning over in his grave!!


> Compare that to (in a hybrid pseudo code)...
> 
>   FOR N=1; N<X; N++
>     :
>     :
>   END_FOR
> 

bill

-- 
Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolves
billg999 at cs.scranton.edu |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton   |
Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>