Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:21933
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 00:53:05 +0100 (CET)
To: Andi Gutmans <andi@zend.com>
cc: Steph Fox <steph@zend.com>, internals <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060218145604.03e678a8@zend.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0602190051500.3442@localhost>
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>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] True labelled breaks
From: derick@php.net (Derick Rethans)

Perhaps not many will use it, that doesn't mean it's useful. I don't 
have much use of the Reflection stuff either, nor do I see its general 
usefulness. That doesn't mean I am against having it in PHP because it 
is useful. In the previous thread we already saw where the labelled 
break was useful, and I would like to see the proposed patch committed.

Derick

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006, Andi Gutmans wrote:

> 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
> > >
> 
> 

-- 
Derick Rethans
http://derickrethans.nl | http://ez.no | http://xdebug.org