> I am not defending the bans, but find it strange that people would be surprised by them.
yes, i think a lot of replies here are speaking past each other, making valid and not actually contradictory points, but not really replying to each other.
if you read the entire doc it is clear that they are pushing c in a very safe, but somewhat unusual direction. there's no dynamic memory for example, so the main reason that most of my c code uses goto - to free memory on failure in a "catch" - is irrelevant.
taken as a whole, it's not what i would call normal c use, and i don't think it's very useful for most other people as a guideline, but it is internally consistent and, for the specific use case, reasonable.
I am not defending the bans, but find it strange that people would be surprised by them.