label question

[Philip Blundell]

>If it's not specified to so serve, then I would think the compiler
>can indeed delete the instructions following the label.  Perhaps it
>could even delete the label itself, making the pointer it passes to
>`bar' undefined.
>
>My reading of the documentation of this GCC feature supports the latter
>interpretation: it is not intended to provide non-local GOTO.
>(I looked it up in `extend.texi' in the EGCS sources.)

Thanks.  Andreas Schwab made the same point; I've now rewritten my code to 
avoid using this construct.

p.