A goto-like usage of a function

[Mel Wilson]

In article <donn-E41903.13311929072004 at gnus01.u.washington.edu>,
Donn Cave <donn at u.washington.edu> wrote:
>In article <64ednb5vPfE7yJTcRVn-pw at powergate.ca>,
> Peter Hansen <peter at engcorp.com> wrote:
>> The acceptance test would probably be: if a mature programmer
>> in the language in question encountered a loop-done-as-recursion
>> in code from, say, a junior programmer, would she refactor it to
>> use a more conventional control structure (e.g. while, or for)
>> or would she not give it a second thought?
>
>Depends of course on the language, but there sure exist
>languages where "while" and "for" don't even exist (and
>hence are not conventional control structures.)  Haskell
>is the one I know.

   Ditto the conditional and macro expansion pseudo-ops in
many Macro-Assemblers.  Multics alm supported assembly-time
loops with the `dup` pseudo-op, but with most assemblers
I've seen, if you want repeated actions at assembly time,
recursive macros are what you use.

   These ideas show up in the darndest places.

        Regards.        Mel.