Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:20881
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:42:25 +0200 (EET)
Reply-To: Jani Taskinen <sniper@iki.fi>
To: Sara Golemon <pollita@php.net>
cc: internals@lists.php.net
In-Reply-To: <2B.E1.14828.4130D834@pb1.pair.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0511301039220.29128@arfg.argcubovn.sv>
References: <2B.E1.14828.4130D834@pb1.pair.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Labeled Break (nothing at all whatsoever to do with
	GOTO)
From: sniper@iki.fi (Jani Taskinen)


     I don't care what kind of GOTO I get as long as I get one.
     Right now I only see need for the forward jumping version,
     but I don't mind if you could jump backwards too. :)

     And I also want VETO on each and every bug report about it. :)
     If anyone dares to report a bug with goto in it -> automatic bogus.

     We make it work for the simple usage it's meant for and if someone
     uses it wrong, too bad. :)

     And the labeled breaks you suggest now can burn in hell!

     --Jani


On Tue, 29 Nov 2005, Sara Golemon wrote:

>
> But first, this word from our sponsor:
> Group A wants anything resembling goto to burn in the fires of hell
> Group B wants full non-crippled goto or nothing at all
> Group C wants partial goto (non-backward jumping) or nothing at all
> Groups B and C both (generally) want it called either GOTO or JUMP, not
> BREAK
>
> Since no group this size will ever come to an agreement on something this
> divisive, I'd like to turn the topic to a completely different language
> feature which (might) please enough people to get a rousing consensus.
>
> Actual labeled breaks.  Not the break+jump that was proposed earlier in the
> guise of a break statement, but an actual straightforward, no funny-business
> labeled break which does no more and no less than the current break N;
> construct, but allows the use of identifier labels rather than numbers which
> may change as the result of the addition or removal of break containers.
>
> http://libssh2.org/patches/true_labeled_break.diff
>
> Usage:
>
> while FOO ($condition) {
>    /* statements */
>    break FOO;
>    /* more statements */
> }
>
> Or a stacked example:
>
> for FOO(;;) {
>    while BAR (true) {
>        foreach BAZ ($arr as $val) {
>            switch Foof ($value) {
>                default:
>                    do Plop {
>                        break FOO;
>                    } while (false);
>            }
>        }
>    }
> }
>
> Notes on this implementation:
>
> * Labels can't be repeated in an ancestral line.  For example, the parser
> will throw an ERROR on the following:
> while FOO(true) {
>    while FOO(true) {
>        break FOO;
>    }
> }
>
> * Labels can be repeated by siblings.  I'm not married to this, and it
> certainly has WTF potential.  This behavior is easily modified to throw an
> error.  I left it permissable because there was no technical reason to
> disallow it.  For example, the following is okay:
> while FOO(true) {
>    break;
> }
> while FOO(true) {
>    break FOO;
> }
>
> * Labeled breaks also apply to continue;  For example:
> foreach FOO($arr as $key => $val) {
>    if ($key % 2) continue FOO;
>    if (empty(%key)) break FOO;
> }
>
>

-- 
Give me your money at @ <http://pecl.php.net/wishlist.php/sniper>
Donating money may make me happier and friendlier for a limited period!
Death to all 4 letter abbreviations starting with P!