Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update goto.adoc #767

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Update goto.adoc #767

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions Language/Structure/Control Structure/goto.adoc
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -66,6 +66,8 @@ bailout:
The use of `goto` is discouraged in C++ programming, and some authors of C++ programming books claim that the `goto` statement is never necessary, but used judiciously, it can simplify certain programs. The reason that many programmers frown upon the use of goto is that with the unrestrained use of `goto` statements, it is easy to create a program with undefined program flow, which can never be debugged.

With that said, there are instances where a `goto` statement can come in handy, and simplify coding. One of these situations is to break out of deeply nested link:../for[for] loops, or link:../if[if] logic blocks, on a certain condition.

It should be considered that - as opposed to functions - a "goto"-code can never return to its calling point. So instead of using the "goto"-control, it is advisable to "break" or "continue" the nested structures and define and call a function instead.
[%hardbreaks]

--
Expand Down