Considered harmful: Difference between revisions

From RetroWikipedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
VisualWikitext
Neologisms requiring hotlinking considered harmful
 
imported>Susko3
m →‎History: Fix style and add links
 
Line 22: Line 22:
| date=March 1968  
| date=March 1968  
| title = Go To Statement Considered Harmful  
| title = Go To Statement Considered Harmful  
| journal = Communications of the ACM  
| journal = [[Communications of the ACM]]
| volume = 11  
| volume = 11  
| issue = 3  
| issue = 3  
Line 30: Line 30:
| url = https://homepages.cwi.nl/~storm/teaching/reader/Dijkstra68.pdf
| url = https://homepages.cwi.nl/~storm/teaching/reader/Dijkstra68.pdf
| quote=The unbridled use of the go to statement has as an immediate consequence that it becomes terribly hard to find a meaningful set of coordinates in which to describe the process progress.  ... The go to statement as it stands is just too primitive, it is too much an invitation to make a mess of one's program.}}</ref><ref name="ewd215">{{Cite EWD|215}}</ref>
| quote=The unbridled use of the go to statement has as an immediate consequence that it becomes terribly hard to find a meaningful set of coordinates in which to describe the process progress.  ... The go to statement as it stands is just too primitive, it is too much an invitation to make a mess of one's program.}}</ref><ref name="ewd215">{{Cite EWD|215}}</ref>
published in the March 1968 ''Communications of the [[Association for Computing Machinery|ACM]]'' (CACM), in which he criticized the excessive use of the [[GOTO]] [[statement (programming)|statement]] in [[programming language]]s of the day and advocated [[structured programming]] instead.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://david.tribble.com/text/goto.html | title = Goto Statement Considered Harmful: A Retrospective | author = David R. Tribble |date=February 2005}}</ref> The original title of the letter, as submitted to CACM, was "A Case Against the Goto Statement", but CACM editor [[Niklaus Wirth]] changed the title to "Goto Statement Considered Harmful".<ref>{{cite EWD|1308|What led to "Notes on Structured Programming"}} (June, 2001)</ref> Regarding this new title, [[Donald Knuth]] quipped that "[[Eiichi Goto|Dr. Goto]] cheerfully complained that he was always being eliminated."<ref>{{cite journal|first=Yasumasa|last=Kanada|title=Events and Sightings: An obituary of Eiichi Goto|page=92|journal=IEEE Annals of the History of Computing|volume=27|issue=3|year=2005|doi=10.1109/MAHC.2005.37|s2cid=675701}}</ref>
published in the March 1968 ''[[Communications of the ACM]]'' (CACM), in which he criticized the excessive use of the [[goto statement]] in [[programming language]]s of the day and advocated [[structured programming]] instead.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://david.tribble.com/text/goto.html | title = Goto Statement Considered Harmful: A Retrospective | author = David R. Tribble |date=February 2005}}</ref> The original title of the letter, as submitted to CACM, was "A Case Against the Goto Statement", but CACM editor [[Niklaus Wirth]] changed the title to "Goto Statement Considered Harmful".<ref>{{cite EWD|1308|What led to "Notes on Structured Programming"}} (June, 2001)</ref> Regarding this new title, [[Donald Knuth]] quipped that "[[Eiichi Goto|Dr. Goto]] cheerfully complained that he was always being eliminated."<ref>{{cite journal|first=Yasumasa|last=Kanada|title=Events and Sightings: An obituary of Eiichi Goto|page=92|journal=IEEE Annals of the History of Computing|volume=27|issue=3|year=2005|doi=10.1109/MAHC.2005.37|s2cid=675701}}</ref>


Frank Rubin published a criticism of Dijkstra's letter in the March 1987 CACM where it appeared under the title ''{{'}}GOTO Considered Harmful' Considered Harmful''.<ref name="rubin87goto">{{cite journal|author=Frank Rubin |date=March 1987 |url=http://www.ecn.purdue.edu/ParaMount/papers/rubin87goto.pdf |title="GOTO Considered Harmful" Considered Harmful |journal=Communications of the ACM |volume=30 |issue=3 |pages=195–196 |doi=10.1145/214748.315722 |s2cid=6853038 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20090320002214/http://www.ecn.purdue.edu/ParaMount/papers/rubin87goto.pdf |archivedate=March 20, 2009 }}</ref>  The May 1987 CACM printed further replies, both for and against, under the title ''{{'"}}GOTO Considered Harmful" Considered Harmful' Considered Harmful?''.<ref name="acm_may87">{{cite journal |author1=Donald Moore |author2=Chuck Musciano |author3=Michael J. Liebhaber |author4=Steven F. Lott |author5=Lee Starr |date=May 1987 | url = http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/1987/5/10097-acm-forum/abstract |format=PDF| title = " 'GOTO Considered Harmful' Considered Harmful" Considered Harmful? | journal = Communications of the ACM | volume = 30 | issue = 5 | pages = 351–355 | doi = 10.1145/22899.315729 |s2cid=42951740 }}</ref> Dijkstra's own response to this controversy was titled ''On a Somewhat Disappointing Correspondence''.<ref name="ewd1009">{{cite EWD|1009|On a Somewhat Disappointing Correspondence}} (May, 1987)</ref>
Frank Rubin published a criticism of Dijkstra's letter in the March 1987 CACM where it appeared under the title ''{{'}}GOTO Considered Harmful' Considered Harmful''.<ref name="rubin87goto">{{cite journal|author=Frank Rubin |date=March 1987 |url=http://www.ecn.purdue.edu/ParaMount/papers/rubin87goto.pdf |title="GOTO Considered Harmful" Considered Harmful |journal=Communications of the ACM |volume=30 |issue=3 |pages=195–196 |doi=10.1145/214748.315722 |s2cid=6853038 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20090320002214/http://www.ecn.purdue.edu/ParaMount/papers/rubin87goto.pdf |archivedate=March 20, 2009 }}</ref>  The May 1987 CACM printed further replies, both for and against, under the title ''{{'"}}GOTO Considered Harmful" Considered Harmful' Considered Harmful?''.<ref name="acm_may87">{{cite journal |author1=Donald Moore |author2=Chuck Musciano |author3=Michael J. Liebhaber |author4=Steven F. Lott |author5=Lee Starr |date=May 1987 | url = http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/1987/5/10097-acm-forum/abstract |format=PDF| title = " 'GOTO Considered Harmful' Considered Harmful" Considered Harmful? | journal = Communications of the ACM | volume = 30 | issue = 5 | pages = 351–355 | doi = 10.1145/22899.315729 |s2cid=42951740 }}</ref> Dijkstra's own response to this controversy was titled ''On a Somewhat Disappointing Correspondence''.<ref name="ewd1009">{{cite EWD|1009|On a Somewhat Disappointing Correspondence}} (May, 1987)</ref>

Latest revision as of 22:27, 28 July 2025

"Achievements considered harmful?" presentation at the 2010 Game Developers Conference

Considered harmful is a part of a phrasal template "something considered harmful". As of 2009, this format been used in the titles of at least 65 critical essays in computer science and related disciplines.[1] Its use in this context originated with a 1968 letter by Edsger Dijkstra published as "Go To Statement Considered Harmful".

History

Considered harmful was already a journalistic cliché used in headlines, well before the Dijkstra article, as in, for example, the headline over a letter published in 1949 in The New York Times: "Rent Control Controversy / Enacting Now of Hasty Legislation Considered Harmful".[2]

Considered harmful was popularized among computer scientists by Edsger Dijkstra's letter "Go To Statement Considered Harmful",[3][4] published in the March 1968 Communications of the ACM (CACM), in which he criticized the excessive use of the goto statement in programming languages of the day and advocated structured programming instead.[5] The original title of the letter, as submitted to CACM, was "A Case Against the Goto Statement", but CACM editor Niklaus Wirth changed the title to "Goto Statement Considered Harmful".[6] Regarding this new title, Donald Knuth quipped that "Dr. Goto cheerfully complained that he was always being eliminated."[7]

Frank Rubin published a criticism of Dijkstra's letter in the March 1987 CACM where it appeared under the title 'GOTO Considered Harmful' Considered Harmful.[8] The May 1987 CACM printed further replies, both for and against, under the title '"GOTO Considered Harmful" Considered Harmful' Considered Harmful?.[9] Dijkstra's own response to this controversy was titled On a Somewhat Disappointing Correspondence.[10]

Snowclones

References

  1. ↑ "Miscellaneous - Considered Harmful". Archived from the original on May 3, 2009. Retrieved August 17, 2009.
  2. ↑ Mark Liberman (April 8, 2008). "Language Log: Considered harmful". Retrieved August 17, 2009.
  3. ↑ Edsger Dijkstra (March 1968). "Go To Statement Considered Harmful" (PDF). Communications of the ACM. 11 (3): 147–148. doi:10.1145/362929.362947. S2CID 17469809. The unbridled use of the go to statement has as an immediate consequence that it becomes terribly hard to find a meaningful set of coordinates in which to describe the process progress. ... The go to statement as it stands is just too primitive, it is too much an invitation to make a mess of one's program.
  4. ↑ Dijkstra, Edsger W. EWD-215 (PDF). E.W. Dijkstra Archive. Center for American History, University of Texas at Austin. (transcription)
  5. ↑ David R. Tribble (February 2005). "Goto Statement Considered Harmful: A Retrospective".
  6. ↑ Dijkstra, Edsger W. What led to "Notes on Structured Programming" (EWD-1308) (PDF). E.W. Dijkstra Archive. Center for American History, University of Texas at Austin. (transcription) (June, 2001)
  7. ↑ Kanada, Yasumasa (2005). "Events and Sightings: An obituary of Eiichi Goto". IEEE Annals of the History of Computing. 27 (3): 92. doi:10.1109/MAHC.2005.37. S2CID 675701.
  8. ↑ Frank Rubin (March 1987). ""GOTO Considered Harmful" Considered Harmful" (PDF). Communications of the ACM. 30 (3): 195–196. doi:10.1145/214748.315722. S2CID 6853038. Archived from the original (PDF) on March 20, 2009.
  9. ↑ Donald Moore; Chuck Musciano; Michael J. Liebhaber; Steven F. Lott; Lee Starr (May 1987). "" 'GOTO Considered Harmful' Considered Harmful" Considered Harmful?" (PDF). Communications of the ACM. 30 (5): 351–355. doi:10.1145/22899.315729. S2CID 42951740.
  10. ↑ Dijkstra, Edsger W. On a Somewhat Disappointing Correspondence (EWD-1009) (PDF). E.W. Dijkstra Archive. Center for American History, University of Texas at Austin. (transcription) (May, 1987)
  11. ↑ "Cat-v.org Random Contrarian Insurgent Organization". cat-v.org.
Retrieved from "https://retrowikipedia.com/index.php?title=Considered_harmful&oldid=10132"