Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:21925 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 56647 invoked by uid 1010); 18 Feb 2006 22:54:22 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 56632 invoked from network); 18 Feb 2006 22:54:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 18 Feb 2006 22:54:22 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 192.38.9.232 gw2.emini.dk Linux 2.4/2.6 Received: from ([192.38.9.232:3086] helo=gw2.emini.dk) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.0 beta r(6323M)) with SMTP id 2D/BF-23065-C95A7F34 for ; Sat, 18 Feb 2006 17:54:21 -0500 Received: from foxbox (IGLD-84-228-50-112.inter.net.il [84.228.50.112]) by gw2.emini.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46A2BA2610; Sat, 18 Feb 2006 23:54:16 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <051f01c634de$45c12df0$6402a8c0@foxbox> Reply-To: "Steph Fox" To: "internals" , "Andi Gutmans" References: <045701c634af$050b5df0$6402a8c0@foxbox><7.0.1.0.2.20060218112459.03e617c0@zend.com><04e401c634db$69a82ff0$6402a8c0@foxbox> <7.0.1.0.2.20060218144712.03e32c18@zend.com> Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 00:54:26 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] True labelled breaks From: steph@zend.com ("Steph Fox") Agreed it's not used very much. That's because people like me think it's scary :) and that's _exactly_ what I was trying to say. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andi Gutmans" To: "Steph Fox" ; "internals" Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 12:48 AM Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] True labelled breaks > It's just something which to begin with isn't used that much. > Grep'ed phpweb/ for it and found 0 occurrences of break n; and I believe > the people developing it would be the ones who would know how to use it. > > Andi > > At 02:33 PM 2/18/2006, Steph Fox wrote: >>I personally find working with numbers difficult, which is why I'm wholly >>in support of this patch. >> >>I doubt I'm the only PHP user with that issue, due to the 'ease of use' >>that allows people with no history of computer science to write useful >>scripts (for which, thank you all). But I wouldn't expect a great deal of >>sympathy on that point from CS graduates. >> >>nb I think implementing goto/equivalent itself is a fairly bad idea - I >>appear to be in the minority on that issue. But I don't see any problem >>with introducing labels, I just see it as a more user-friendly way of >>allowing nested breaks. >> >>Am I very wrong? >> >> >>----- Original Message ----- From: "Andi Gutmans" >>To: "Steph Fox" ; "internals" >>Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2006 9:30 PM >>Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] True labelled breaks >> >> >>>I think that in 1997 when break/continue n where implemented it would >>>have been a nice idea, but at this stage except for being more elegant >>>than break/continue n it doesn't truly add anything substantial to PHP >>>(and as you already mentioned it's orthogonal to the goto discussion). I >>>think having more than 1 way of doing the same thing, in this case, might >>>just end up confusing people developing with PHP (i.e. the Perl way :) >>> >>>Just for the record I am coming at this from an open mind. Dmitry did >>>spend time on this patch, etc... >>> >>>I'd recommend to bed it once and for all. >>> >>>At 09:16 AM 2/18/2006, Steph Fox wrote: >>>>Guys and guyess, >>>> >>>>Sara and Dmitry's patch to introduce labelled breaks was discussed on >>>>internals@ ever-so-briefly at the beginning of December, but there was >>>>never any decision made over it. >>>> >>>>Given that practically everyone who survived the preceding GOTO >>>>discussion seemed to think it was a good idea at the time, could you >>>>please re-visit it, evaluate it, discuss it (as opposed to talking about >>>>GOTO, which is unrelated) and either OK it or put it to bed for once and >>>>for all? >>>> >>>>Relevant summary is at >>>>http://www.zend.com/zend/week/week265.php#Heading3 >>>>Relevant patch is at http://www.zend.com/zend/week/pat/index.php >>>> >>>>And if it's worth anything, +1 from me. >>>> >>>>- Steph >>>>-- >>>>PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >>>>To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >>> >>>-- >>>PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >>>To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >>> >>> >>>__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________ >>> >>>This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. >>>http://www.eset.com >>> > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > > __________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________ > > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. > http://www.eset.com > >