I don't think your presented view is any more objective than mine. But, I agree with, pretty much, everything you said.
In my own practice, and there are plenty of examples of code that I have written on line and that are publicly viewable, I do not use goto in C.
During development of a program, I will use goto in C programs. This is largely a debugging technique and, typically, its usage is something like a breakpoint, e.g., "here: goto here"; Beyond that, I might use it to simulate or rather 'bookmark' something akin to what I would call a terminal error - knowing that eventually this will become a function.
In this case, I chose to use goto to easily and succinctly illustrate a process for the OP, whom as I predicted, has not as yet returned and gave little information about his level of experience and understanding.
If you do a simple search for "why is goto bad" or something similar like "is goto still bad" you will get a large number of hits and plenty of misunderstandings and a few pros and more cons. If you take the time to go through more formal discussions (e.g.,
http://david.tribble.com/text/goto.html) you can gain a much better understanding of the history and true relevance of the issue. For example, breaking out of nested loops and you can consider programming languages that do not have a goto and why C has not removed goto from the standard and so on and so forth.
To believe that the use of a single GOTO in that example merits condemnation "still no reason to use it, particularly in the example in question." is nonsense. What now, it is spaghetti code? It was a simple and straightforward example that illustrated well the issue.
In the instant case, I took the time and effort to write a simple program that directly addressed what the OP asked. I did not just write and include the code, I took a picture of the resulting output and went through some length to explain it and the caveats involved. I even suggested an additional, and likely, "better" solution for a few cents more.
For that, I was met with a clearly condescending criticism, and in response, I made fun it I mocked it, pointedly and efficiently. Guilty as charged. But the criticism was largely BS and little more than, well you got the program right but what is the matter with you?! You used a GOTO!! All of this from someone who posted nothing else of substance in the thread other than pointing to an example of clc usage - after I had already posted links to clc usage/examples and addressed that issue, which another user brought up.
Your point about the frailty of a beginner who might see a GOTO and think that it is ok to use them, is a bit contrived, but is not without some merit. That is not, however, always a practical matter for a public forum and this place is certainly not an Introduction to C class. If all messages need to strictly adhere to a beginner as the lowest common denominator, the subject matter would necessarily be so limited that it can only be considered for beginners.
This is a matter of style and a matter of how a user responded to a legitimate post that I maintain, made a legitimate and appropriate contribution. Contrast that response with my response to your suggested solution to the op amp input
in this thread. Your proposed solution was, in fact, listed in a linked reference that I provided in the first post, of what NOT to do. Your post received a like from a very well respected (and deservedly so) member.
Did you see me condescend to you and say something like..Hah!! I knew it! You so-called hardware experts don't know what you are talking about. I did not. I responded respectfully and, if anything, in a self-deprecating manner, because in that case (but not this case) I am the beginner. Moreover, I have no reason to not respect you as I have read many of your posts and I don't have to think that every single thing that you have written is correct for me to show you respect.
When I read those condescending post(s), I wanted to metaphorically, "slap the boy". Do you think I don't know what while(1) is son? Do you think that while(1) is easier to understand (see
here for example)? Now, the small point being made could have been made in a respectful tone, but it was not - that was not an accident. I can see three such examples in the last few weeks and only one of those involved me.
That is, in my opinion, what has gone on here and I will continue to stick up for myself and, on occasion, when I feel like it, call out BS. Is it worth the bickering and retaliation? - I don't know, maybe not, but maybe it is, because how users who contribute (a lot or a little bit) are treated has a good deal to do with the success or failure of a public board...and there are many to choose from.
I am also fine with letting you or Nigel get the last word on this (so long as it is not completely ridiculous).