RE: [ros-dev] Re: [ros-svn] [gdalsnes]18113:-reorderInsertXscendingOrder macro argument order and update uses

[Ge van Geldorp]

>   From: Gunnar Dalsnes
>
> >   Oh, so goto's are acceptable if and only if
> > you hide them 
> >  out of sight? 
>  
>  No, i think gotos are ok internally but i dont like them for return. 
>  First set a retval and then goto to the end. ugh...ly. 
The definition of your RETURN():

#define RETURN(value) { _ret_ = value; goto _cleanup_; }

which seems to set a retval and then does a goto to the end. So, again,
"ugly code" (your words, not mine) is acceptable if you hide it out of
sight?
BTW, the following code which looks perfectly acceptable won't compile
correctly with your definition:

if (somecondition)
  RETURN(errorcode);
else
  do_something_else();

I admit this is a bit contrived example, you don't need the "else".

Gé van Geldorp.