goto a no-go?

[monarch_dodra]

On Tuesday, 1 October 2013 at 13:09:01 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> On Tuesday, 1 October 2013 at 13:02:56 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 1 October 2013 at 12:46:50 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
>>> Can't you use scope guards for that too? Those work for any 
>>> scope, not only function scope.
>>
>> I hadn't thought of that before, but I don't think so. scope 
>> guards are designed to run a specific piece of code, no mater 
>> the code path.
>>
>> What I mostly want to do is just break out of a "control 
>> block".
>>
>> Either that, or I'm being retarded...?
> (I think your snippet misses actual labels so it was unclear:))

Right, sorry.

> In that case you can always replace "control block + goto" with 
> nested function + return + scope guard inside it (if some 
> cleanup code needs to be run) unless I am missing something.

I was going to say: "but using functions is a pain when you have 
variables that are in scope you need to reuse", but I keep 
forgetting that D can indeed nest functions.

The only "limitation" of using a nested function, as opposed to a 
"breakable block", is that can't move code into a nested 
function, if it contains a (conditional) return.

I guess the conclusion is that each code snippet is unique. With 
enough effort, you can probably eliminate goto from almost any 
example. I do find that sometimes, you tend to have to jump 
through hoops for that tough, and the final code is not 
necessarily "better" either.