Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:21929
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20060218151346.046275d0@zend.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 15:14:03 -0800
To: "Steph Fox" <steph@zend.com>,"internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <053c01c634e0$9a426900$6402a8c0@foxbox>
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>
	<051f01c634de$45c12df0$6402a8c0@foxbox>
	<7.0.1.0.2.20060218145604.03e678a8@zend.com>
	<053c01c634e0$9a426900$6402a8c0@foxbox>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] True labelled breaks
From: andi@zend.com (Andi Gutmans)

Argh, re-read my first email. I gave my reasoning there...

At 03:11 PM 2/18/2006, Steph Fox wrote:
>Erm - I'd consider myself one of 'the devs' as far as that goes. 
>Perhaps I wasn't very clear.
>
>There is a feature in PHP that could easily be made more 
>user-friendly, and we have before us a patch that could do that.
>
>I'm failing to understand why it's problematic to use it.
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Andi Gutmans" <andi@zend.com>
>To: "Steph Fox" <steph@zend.com>; "internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
>Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 12:56 AM
>Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] True labelled breaks
>
>
>>Yeah but my point was that even people for who it isn't scary (the 
>>devs) don't use it very much :) It's just something which isn't 
>>needed very often. So we're wasting lots of bandwidth on something 
>>which not many will use anyway :)
>>
>>Andi
>>
>>At 02:54 PM 2/18/2006, Steph Fox wrote:
>>>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" <andi@zend.com>
>>>To: "Steph Fox" <steph@zend.com>; "internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
>>>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" <andi@zend.com>
>>>>>To: "Steph Fox" <steph@zend.com>; "internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
>>>>>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
>>
>>--
>>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
>>