Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:21934 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 87685 invoked by uid 1010); 19 Feb 2006 00:13:30 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 87670 invoked from network); 19 Feb 2006 00:13:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 19 Feb 2006 00:13:30 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 80.74.107.235 mail.zend.com Linux 2.5 (sometimes 2.4) (4) Received: from ([80.74.107.235:26181] helo=mail.zend.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.0 beta r(6323M)) with SMTP id 88/34-23065-828B7F34 for ; Sat, 18 Feb 2006 19:13:28 -0500 Received: (qmail 1712 invoked from network); 19 Feb 2006 00:13:23 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ANDI-NOTEBOOK.zend.com) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 19 Feb 2006 00:13:23 -0000 Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20060218161117.02a16628@zend.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 16:13:22 -0800 To: Derick Rethans Cc: Steph Fox ,internals In-Reply-To: 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"; format=flowed Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] True labelled breaks From: andi@zend.com (Andi Gutmans) As I said, the syntax is quite elegant and the patch isn't too bad either. However, I do suggest we only add it if people are really convinced that it'll be used. Reflection falls into a different category in my opinion, because it actually allows you to do stuff you couldn't really do before... It's a bad comparison. Andi At 03:53 PM 2/18/2006, Derick Rethans wrote: >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" > > >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 > > > > > > > > > >-- >Derick Rethans >http://derickrethans.nl | http://ez.no | http://xdebug.org