Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:107583 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 26050 invoked from network); 20 Oct 2019 02:58:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp3.php.net) (208.43.231.12) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 20 Oct 2019 02:58:55 -0000 Received: from php-smtp3.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp3.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB8042D1FE9 for ; Sat, 19 Oct 2019 17:44:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp3.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Virus: No Received: from mail-yb1-xb35.google.com (mail-yb1-xb35.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp3.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Sat, 19 Oct 2019 17:44:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb1-xb35.google.com with SMTP id 4so2986548ybq.9 for ; Sat, 19 Oct 2019 17:44:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=newclarity-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=rFvAv+xTD89lb+uVu+XQpn+D0U/7hDwIpGg5QaJvYS8=; b=iRJFTU3CjotvabnWFLKbZ1PbwRk8ABzh6kWuapGW0y78LBix812d+e5iZAARmIKVkE CRX8dhPLNSu5AS2wD5f7tUQh9aFbX/GcUIp+5crQ3j2x2f30wls4+GTXO+4BlI0nfSjC IY1UjfRWCp06+u+6sjqTbazCHwPYxsawSvTsyVt3zRZzwKYCAfrqptxdKRGr7dIahyKe 9AJL/U0Yv1G4/17KSB8HWs5l9/srxTpUtH36jq5iHWqIHM6Fj29ADVFdfsfnFuu4Pa0B KNltH3fY0SS8UPYGwtYFijvWwGK3UG/3Wue/LDryLQx4vdapEz8ElRZJ4VWnqHGzlTok 4uhQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=rFvAv+xTD89lb+uVu+XQpn+D0U/7hDwIpGg5QaJvYS8=; b=JYqzgi+Kunimf+2fec0KICjggXf7rd8yqP2hDi6icVSOh4ThoSEIHwvXPt5G7caMAI T3qUcB4hhizRdCIkzmZGWvUzQP+/90MCC0DInv+E7fMjdJ/ji9h27cIbPSorUYT/ZA/g +RFl1fdQaLda+oWsAVGW7vt/8ATqhK7/C2rFz/wY5rOsJ0Yuvd4VJuDnLBF1y0+DafIE /BexqecQRtV8CtUxvNp/DVUZGg3nqfCSAUHGHt+ZcqdWFcl6uUYfoZy88JCcdX2Q3FMr pmgCp1n5Ic11kBTJ4t3HZlMVzVibhdDdTgdGB3u4zJuYd4dRi7JztT8ycbfzk2qboYtP 5+1g== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWzyW60oi++7myZgYVHa+R9jLtkDfeyXJS5PfFx70ASxL1huMO2 SbMlmSQ5laWyA43hIQ1zMUlAvyofhSNAhA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwOfLlYLNj+0LAFSGnrmarx2R5NmWWIPc/lf0XwmQeXr6G0cEHsEOrHaCuLAyZEOzqNdWozYQ== X-Received: by 2002:a25:5f43:: with SMTP id h3mr10825784ybm.278.1571532250777; Sat, 19 Oct 2019 17:44:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:c0:c67f:e34e:4135:43c4:3532:a219? ([2601:c0:c67f:e34e:4135:43c4:3532:a219]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r14sm2837734ywl.97.2019.10.19.17.44.09 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 19 Oct 2019 17:44:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_50582848-4EAD-43EF-99E2-75C33AEDFC02" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\)) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2019 20:44:09 -0400 In-Reply-To: Cc: "A.L.E.C" , PHP internals list To: Kris Craig References: <929062F1-E83F-4D81-B2C6-3916B744E101@newclarity.net> <5da8e051.1c69fb81.b05ef.ef7dSMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> <11ada3a9-ee9a-1364-7a06-96d1533d544b@alec.pl> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) X-Envelope-From: Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Adding explicit intent for SWITCH/CASE fall through? From: mike@newclarity.net (Mike Schinkel) --Apple-Mail=_50582848-4EAD-43EF-99E2-75C33AEDFC02 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > On Oct 19, 2019, at 3:21 AM, Kris Craig wrote: > If we're going to do this, let's take the opportunity to make it even = more > useful. =20 Assuming this idea truly does have momentum, I hope we do not get so = focused on the `perfect` that we postpone the `good` indefinitely. There = is always next version... > I love the idea of being able to explicitly define fallthrough > points in a case. Can you elaborate on this, with use-cases and syntax examples, please? > I agree that "continue" is the logically ideal solution, but the BC > breakage negates that. So I'd have to go with "next", as it's both = concise > and descriptive. Given A.L.E.C.'s point about BCy, I think `next` would be much more = likely to conflict with code-in-the-wild than `fallthrough.` That said, if we overload `continue` with an argument of `next`, that = might be best of both worlds, e.g. `continue next;` -Mike --Apple-Mail=_50582848-4EAD-43EF-99E2-75C33AEDFC02--