On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 at 16:36, Jan Schultke <janschultke_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> > > then do the sets of labels NEED to be separated, strictly speaking, from a technical viewpoint?
> >
> > From a purely technical viewpoint, an unstructured jump construct like
> > goto has the potential to significantly increase
> > the cyclomatic complexity of the code.
>
> In other words, no. An increase in cyclomatic complexity is not
> something which categorically makes a feature impossible to have. It's
> just a metric which, ideally, should be kept low.

Nobody said the word "impossible", but other than that, I vehemently
disagree with your suggestion
that that is an "in other words, no". It's "in other words, yes".

> Also, adding labels has no impact on cyclomatic complexity.

Of course, but it's quite enough that it opens the door to such complexity.

> > See, the 'dislike' for goto isn't a 'dislike' at all.
>
> Yes, it is.

No, it isn't.

> We're like 10 messages into this and still only talking
> about "perceived complexity" and not a single problem has been brought

It's not perceived, it's measurable.

> up that can't be resolved with naming conventions.

Oh yeah, like we don't need namespaces, access controls (or separate
struct/class) because you can
solve all the problems under the sun just by naming conventions.

This problem can't be "solved" by naming conventions, because they do
not actually solve the problem.