# Best practice -- \*choice vs \*fake\_choice

**URL:** <https://forum.choiceofgames.com/t/best-practice-choice-vs-fake-choice/78244>\
**Category:** ChoiceScript Help\
**Created:** [May 1, 2020, 6:19am UTC](https://forum.choiceofgames.com/t/best-practice-choice-vs-fake-choice/78244 "2020-05-01T06:19:54Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 19

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Szaal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/choiceofgames/user_avatar/forum.choiceofgames.com/szaal/32/112202_2.png) [@Szaal](https://forum.choiceofgames.com/u/Szaal)\
**Post date:** [May 1, 2020, 7:59pm UTC](https://forum.choiceofgames.com/t/best-practice-choice-vs-fake-choice/78244/19 "2020-05-01T19:59:18Z")

</div>

I know. It’s very easy to understand it even if you only ever scraped the surface of programming. However, many others are simply go “What? Coding? I’m out.” I’ve seen numbers of it happening in this forum.

`*fake_choice` might be an old thing, and `*setref` is also a proof that CS is unafraid of evolving. However, this one is a pretty finicky case where even Dan isn’t unsure if ICF is bug free and whether to have it on by default on that cost.

> [@New ChoiceScript features: implicit control flow, gosub parameters](https://forum.choiceofgames.com/t/new-choicescript-features-implicit-control-flow-gosub-parameters/30042/1):
>
> It’s possible that everybody will love ICF so much that we’ll enable it by default at some point. It certainly makes it easier to get your ideas down on the page; we’ll see if it comes at the expense of having more bugs.

* * *

So, yeah. Maybe the wiki needs some massive revamps? 😬

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.choiceofgames.com/t/best-practice-choice-vs-fake-choice/78244)._