Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:11657
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Organization: Solarix Srl
To: internals@lists.php.net
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 10:12:10 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.6.1
References: <20040729021337.73894.qmail@pb1.pair.com> <200407291531.32614.alex.pagnoni@solarix.it> <4109ACC6.4040100@leetspeak.org>
In-Reply-To: <4109ACC6.4040100@leetspeak.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <200407301012.11170.alex.pagnoni@solarix.it>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO operator
From: alex.pagnoni@solarix.it (Alex Pagnoni)

Alle 04:04, venerd=EC 30 luglio 2004, hai scritto:

> Where do you see the correlation between OOP and the presence/absence of
> "goto"?

It is not for the OOP model by itself, but for a general code maintenabilit=
y=20
issue that OOP languages tend to address, while a too powerful goto operato=
r=20
may cause certain abuses from not well experienced programmers.

Being involved in the open source world, I frequently have to deal with=20
other's code. I hope not to find a day a project that I have to internally=
=20
deal with, containing a jungle of gotos.

It is a sort of strategical decision - while it seems to me that with the n=
ew=20
ZE the PHP language is suggesting the path for a more and more (hopefully)=
=20
maintenable code, it seems also that with a goto operator we also allow to=
=20
produce less even maintenable code.

But reading the various posts here, I changed a little my opinion. I'm in=20
favor of a goto operator if the "scope" of its labels is limited to, say, a=
=20
function/method only. My experience with basic is dated at about twenty yea=
rs=20
ago so in my mind there are ugly examples like 10 print / 20 goto 10 :-)

So now I can give, as others said, my +0.00000001.

Alex