HP50g: local LBL and GOTO in user or sysRPL

[DavidM]

(09-09-2016 10:35 AM)3298 Wrote:  I guess I should showcase my version in a program as well...

Nicely done. Putting some of the preliminary steps in a reusable code object adds efficiency.

(09-09-2016 10:35 AM)3298 Wrote:  But I'll have to ask: what usecases for goto does SysRPL have?

I agree with you on this. Not only agree, but I must confess that I still feel that the risks outweigh any advantage to using this type of construct. In a real program, it would be far too easy to overlook a critical issue (traversing secondaries, skipping ABND, "breaking" error traps, etc.). Troubleshooting could be problematic because some of the resulting problems would be memory leaks that might not show up for a while. Just seems like more trouble than it's worth to go this route.

A similar technique might have limited use for a GOSUB construct, though, at least in certain scenarios. Like you, I usually place SysRPL subroutines in LAMs when not building a library. But there could be times when you don't want to alter the temporary environment structure that this could come into play. Might be worth investigating, and it seems like a GOSUB wouldn't carry the same risks as a GOTO.