Two misconceptions about structured programming

Subscribe (Full Service)


	Search: The ACM Digital Library The Guide

	Feedback

Two misconceptions about structured programming

Full text

Pdf (211 KB)

Source

ACM Annual Conference/Annual Meeting archive
Proceedings of the 1975 annual conference table of contents

Pages: 214 - 215

Year of Publication: 1975

Author

Peter J. Denning

Sponsor

ACM: Association for Computing Machinery

Publisher

ACM New York, NY, USA

Bibliometrics

Downloads (6 Weeks): 4, Downloads (12 Months): 16, Citation Count: 2

Additional Information:

abstract cited by index terms collaborative colleagues

Tools and Actions:	Request Permissions Review this Article Save this Article to a Binder Display Formats: BibTeX EndNote ACM Ref

DOI Bookmark:	Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/800181.810321 What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

For some time I and others have been exhorting promoters of 'structured programming' to define what they mean by it. To my delight this has been happening more and more frequently. Yet, as they pen their definitions, many writers are revealing their ignorance of the basic issues to which Dahl, Dijkstra, Hoare, Knuth, Wirth and others have attempted to draw our attention when discussing 'structured programming' [11, 14, 22, 23, 30, 31]. Two misconceptions in particular have been turning up with alarming frequency.

CITED BY 2

	David Harel, On folk theorems, Communications of the ACM, v.23 n.7, p.379-389, July 1980
	David Harel, On folk theorems, ACM SIGACT News, v.12 n.3, Fall 1980