One major problem with assembly language is that it takes several statements to realize a simple idea encapsulated by a single high-level language statement. All too often an assembly language programmer will notice that she or he can save a few bytes or cycles by jumping into the middle of some program structure. After a few such observations (and corresponding modifications) the code contains a whole sequence of jumps in and out of portions of the code. If you were to draw a line from each jump to its destination, the resulting listing would end up looking like someone dumped a bowl of spaghetti on your code, hence the term spaghetti code.
Spaghetti code suffers from one major drawbackâit's difficult (at best) to read such a program and figure out what it does. Most programs start out in a "structured" form only to become spaghetti code when sacrificed at the altar of efficiency. Alas, spaghetti code is rarely efficient. Because it's difficult to figure out exactly what's going on, it's very difficult to determine if you can use a better algorithm to improve the system. Hence, spaghetti code may wind up less efficient than structured code.
While it's true that producing some spaghetti code in your programs may improve its efficiency, doing so should always be a last resort after you've tried everything else and you still haven't achieved what you need. Always start out writing your programs with straightforward if and switch statements. Start combining sections of code (via jmp instructions) once everything is working and well understood. Of course, you should never obliterate the structure of your code unless the gains are worth it.
A famous saying in structured programming circles is, "After gotos, pointers are the next most dangerous element in a programming language." A similar saying is "Pointers are to data structures what gotos are to control structures." In other words, avoid excessive use of pointers. If pointers and gotos are bad, then the indirect jump must be the worst construct of all because it involves both gotos and pointers! Seriously, though, the indirect jump instruction should be avoided for casual use. Its use tends to make a program harder to read. After all, an indirect jump can (theoretically) transfer control to any point within a program. Imagine how hard it would be to follow the flow through a program if you have no idea what a pointer contains and you come across an indirect jump using that pointer. Therefore, you should always exercise care when using jump indirect instructions.