Re: [wsbpel] Gotos Considered Harmful?

[Ron Ten-Hove <Ronald.Ten-Hove@Sun.COM>]

    I afraid we may be reasoning by anology here. Cycles in a process 
graph may "smell" like gotos to those of  us steeped in the lore of 
 software engineering, but to a business analyst they are a natural, 
necessary construct. They describe how real business processes work.

    Trying to impose "fashionable" structured software concepts on 
another domain sounds like a  questionable exercise, if the objective is 
to model the business process at a high level. If this is not the 
intent, then let us by all means attempt to structure BPEL processes 
according to good software engineering practices, including being wary 
of unstructured constructs.

-Ron

P.S. Does anybody remember computed GOTOs in Fortran IV? If gotos are 
considered to be harmful, then the computed goto must be life-threatening!

Jim Webber wrote:

>After hearing the arguments against Gotos on today's telcon, I have to
>(unfashionably) suggest that they're not so bad. See:
>http://www.ppig.org/papers/12th-marshall.pdf for a short argument in favour
>of not ignoring Gotos. 
>
>Note it isn't BPEL-specific, but makes the general point that there are some
>places where a Goto is the right thing to use (though those situations are
>few and far between).
>
>Jim
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsbpel-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: wsbpel-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>
>  
>