me: goto isn't bad to use in all cases, you just have to be careful with it
me, shortly thereafter: turns out my insurance doesn't cover pitchfork wounds
@typhlosion
me: everything is goto when you disassemble the bytecode deep enough.
@typhlosion I feel strongly that complaining about HOW to code is people doing something else so they don't HAVE to code.
@Fuego in general i agree, but the opinions of others are worth at least a passing consideration if you're writing code you intend anyone else to view and comprehend at any point in the future
@typhlosion luckily when you write exploits for a living 99% of your control flow code isn't actually in the exploit - its the program you're exploiting, so the person who wants to understand your code has to reverse the target to sort it out 100% of the time.
Everything else I write are just my own tools ;)
@Fuego @typhlosion To be sure, coding standards on a team are a good way to help people spot what I've come to call "code smell," the Bad Ideas that I've just learned Not To Do because they're inefficient, but explaining _why_ is hard and takes a long time to understand. That, however, assumes you have a team, and they care about such things.
@Fuego @typhlosion
Me, a computer scientist: GOTO is a terrible linguistic concept and any high-level language should be embarrassed by its inclusion.
Me, a programmer: break, continue, next, and last are all GOTO by other names, and nobody complains about them. Sometimes you want to short-circuit other parts of your code.
Me, a hacker: // LOL make this a function later my life is pain this should live in its own package worms in my brain get them out.
@Fuego @literorrery me, cosmic brain: [quietly writes code with self-modifying jumps]
@typhlosion @literorrery *SUPER NOVA EXPLODING BRAIN*
@Fuego well of course, same if you're hand rolling assembly, but that doesn't stop people from complaining endlessly and needlessly about its use in higher level contexts