problems/risks ...

[Robert A. Osborne]

lou at atanasoff.rutgers.edu (Lou Steinberg) writes:
>jbaker at gmu90x.gmu.edu (jbaker) writes:
>> But the real usefulness of requiring break in a switch statement is for
>> SIMILAR treatments of similar cases, for example you may require a
>> few assignments in one case before a more complicated computation which
>> must be performed for several of the cases.
>
>ARGHHH!!  That is what subroutines (and macros) are for - to handle
>common code.  And if your language makes them too expensive, either in
>terms of run time or in terms of programmer effort, then THAT is an
>even worse problem with the language than the problems with break.
ARGHHH!! Why are we constantly bombarded with people who do not understand
that PEFORMANCE IS SOMETIMES AN ISSUE!!!!!

I was under the impression that C's function calls are, relative to other
high level languages, very inexpensive, (is this still true?)
in which case if you are using fall-through to gain speed (which I have
done several times) there is probably a good reason!

I'm tired of people blithly saying that "such and such is dangerous,
and hence should be removed from the language" when I need such
things to get interactive performance.  How many people posting to
this group(s) are actually using C in a production environment?

Rob.
-- 
Robert A. Osborne   {...uunet!mnetor,...utzoo}!lsuc!isgtec!robert