I don't think that is a good idea. The "goto fail" was a problem due to either a high level of incompetence, or due to intent disguised as a high level of incompetence. I think well-placed gotos are actually clearer and less risky than the structured programming equivalents. What happened with iOS would have been blatantly obvious with even minimal code review or a single test-case for the skipped functionality. That these were not done is pretty bad. Of course, the final decision is Milan's. But I think what would be far better is that you review all these goto's as to whether any of them is a problem. That is still less useful than a real review, but at least it may alleviate the concerns of the "syntactic matching people" that see the "goto" as a problem (or "sha-1", or the like) instead of the specific use. Arno On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 21:39:11 CET, Lars Winterfeld wrote: > Hi, > > in light of the latest "goto fail"s out there, would you reject a patch > replacing all 328 gotos with their semantic equivalents from structured > C programming? > > Best wishes, > Lars > _______________________________________________ > dm-crypt mailing list > dm-crypt@xxxxxxxx > http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt -- Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., Email: arno@xxxxxxxxxxx GnuPG: ID: CB5D9718 FP: 12D6 C03B 1B30 33BB 13CF B774 E35C 5FA1 CB5D 9718 ---- A good decision is based on knowledge and not on numbers. - Plato _______________________________________________ dm-crypt mailing list dm-crypt@xxxxxxxx http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt
