Excuse me, but:
Is a steaming pile of crap. Next time I'm working with C++ I'll suddenly start typing in some Lisp shall I, and see how it goes. Then I'll whinge to Microsoft because their C++ compiler doesn't support Lisp, right?
The whole challenge of programming is to work within the constraints of the language, which the compiler adheres to. If there was no challenge involved we wouldn't need programmers and there wouldn't really be programming "languages".
Now you can suggest stuff be changed I guess, but I can get by fine without goto and plenty of other people have come up with good enough work arounds.
I'd rather the function of strict wasn't changed or that goto was dropped completely. And John Pickford is right, Exit[n] IS horrible. Mark COULD add another compiler directive to support goto while allowing strict variable name handling.
The last thing the compiler should be doing is dictating style to me.
Is a steaming pile of crap. Next time I'm working with C++ I'll suddenly start typing in some Lisp shall I, and see how it goes. Then I'll whinge to Microsoft because their C++ compiler doesn't support Lisp, right?
The whole challenge of programming is to work within the constraints of the language, which the compiler adheres to. If there was no challenge involved we wouldn't need programmers and there wouldn't really be programming "languages".
Now you can suggest stuff be changed I guess, but I can get by fine without goto and plenty of other people have come up with good enough work arounds.
I'd rather the function of strict wasn't changed or that goto was dropped completely. And John Pickford is right, Exit[n] IS horrible. Mark COULD add another compiler directive to support goto while allowing strict variable name handling.