Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:58246 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 98591 invoked from network); 28 Feb 2012 15:47:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 28 Feb 2012 15:47:59 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ceo@l-i-e.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ceo@l-i-e.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain l-i-e.com designates 67.139.134.202 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ceo@l-i-e.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.139.134.202 o2.hostbaby.com FreeBSD 4.7-5.2 (or MacOS X 10.2-10.3) (2) Received: from [67.139.134.202] ([67.139.134.202:1238] helo=o2.hostbaby.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id C3/43-17048-C27FC4F4 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 10:47:58 -0500 Received: (qmail 30303 invoked by uid 98); 28 Feb 2012 15:47:56 -0000 Received: from localhost by o2.hostbaby.com (envelope-from , uid 1013) with qmail-scanner-2.05 ( Clear:RC:1(127.0.0.1):. Processed in 0.037525 secs); 28 Feb 2012 15:47:56 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO www.l-i-e.com) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 28 Feb 2012 15:47:55 -0000 Received: from webmail (SquirrelMail authenticated user ceo@l-i-e.com) by www.l-i-e.com with HTTP; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 09:47:55 -0600 Message-ID: <0c0bba740a67cb75c1ca8536a4f1a2b3.squirrel@www.l-i-e.com> In-Reply-To: References: <01a901ccf622$0645f230$12d1d690$@alliantinternet.com> Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 09:47:55 -0600 To: internals@lists.php.net User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.21 [SVN] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Possibility to add finally to try/catch? From: ceo@l-i-e.com ("Richard Lynch") https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=36779 Not to say that "finally" shouldn't be added, but I don't think this lock inside a loop is a particularly compelling example... Either that loop is going to wait a whole lot for an exclusive lock at every iteration, or the locks aren't exclusive and could be more easily built up in an array and disposed of after the loop. Of course, for now, we have GOTO which might be of use in these situations. :-) Though I'm not sure you could effectively manage the (constrained to make wanton usage difficult) GOTO statements and targets if you need this a lot. -- brain cancer update: http://richardlynch.blogspot.com/search/label/brain%20tumor Donate: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=FS9NLTNEEKWBE