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
I'll avoid re-iterating all of the comments I've said back in December
and simply summarize by saying -1.
Ilia
You talked a lot about goto at the time. You never even looked at this
particular patch, just assumed it was something you'd already said 'no' to.
Please take the time to look again.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ilia Alshanetsky" ilia@prohost.org
To: "Steph Fox" steph@zend.com
Cc: "internals" internals@lists.php.net
Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2006 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] True labelled breaks
I'll avoid re-iterating all of the comments I've said back in December and
simply summarize by saying -1.Ilia
--
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
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.phpAnd if it's worth anything, +1 from me.
- Steph
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.phpAnd if it's worth anything, +1 from me.
- Steph
----
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
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 breaksI 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.phpAnd if it's worth anything, +1 from me.
- Steph
----
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
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 breaksI 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.phpAnd if it's worth anything, +1 from me.
- Steph
----
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com--
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
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 breaksIt'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 breaksI 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.phpAnd if it's worth anything, +1 from me.
- Steph
----
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com--
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
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 breaksIt'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 breaksI 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.phpAnd if it's worth anything, +1 from me.
- Steph
----
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com--
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com--
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
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 breaksYeah 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 breaksIt'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 breaksI 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.phpAnd if it's worth anything, +1 from me.
- Steph
----
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com--
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com--
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
Your chief argument was that having two ways to do things is intrinsically
perl-ish and un-PHP-like.
My chief argument is that the single existing way isn't user-friendly.
Your secondary argument was that nested breaks are rarely used in PHP
anyway.
I think your secondary argument is directly related to my chief argument.
Is all, I'll quit now. If nobody on the dev team cares about it any more
(despite the fact that all of them liked the idea at the time save Ilia and
Jani) then it's going nowhere anyway.
- Steph
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andi Gutmans" andi@zend.com
To: "Steph Fox" steph@zend.com; "internals" internals@lists.php.net
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 1:14 AM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] True labelled breaks
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 breaksYeah 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 breaksIt'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 breaksI 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.phpAnd if it's worth anything, +1 from me.
- Steph
----
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com--
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com--
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com--
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
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
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 breaksIt'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 breaksI 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.phpAnd if it's worth anything, +1 from me.
- Steph
----
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com--
__________ 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
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
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 breaksIt'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 breaksI 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.phpAnd if it's worth anything, +1 from me.
- Steph
----
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com--
__________ 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
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.
I will use it. << that good enough? :) But seriously, I have quite a few
cases where I would use it if it was available.
regards,
Derick
Derick Rethans
http://derickrethans.nl | http://ez.no | http://xdebug.org
Derick Rethans wrote:
I will use it. << that good enough? :) But seriously, I have quite a few
cases where I would use it if it was available.
same here ... i tried to avoid the current "break n;" where ever
possible as it is easy to run into a maintainance nightmare with
it (renumbering! this is so 80ies BASIC ...), so i tend to use
flag variables instead in cases where i need to terminate several
nested loops.
labeled breaks are so much better/cleaner than both approaches
above that i'd really love to have them ...
IMHO "break n;" is even more evil than "goto label;", it is almost
in the same league as "goto linenumber;" ...
--
Hartmut Holzgraefe, Senior Support Engineer .
MySQL AB, www.mysql.com
I think not many people use it because it's difficult to use.
Having real labels might change that.
Personally, I'd prefer real goto, as I've stated in the past.
Just for the record again, I'm +1 for goto, and +0.5 for labelled
breaks only if we've totally given up on goto.
--Wez.
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 breaksI 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.phpAnd if it's worth anything, +1 from me.
- Steph
----
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
Wez, that patch allows for the possibility of a future 'goto' (which it
calls 'jump'). It just doesn't implement it...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wez Furlong" kingwez@gmail.com
To: "Andi Gutmans" andi@zend.com
Cc: "Steph Fox" steph@zend.com; "internals" internals@lists.php.net
Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 1:09 AM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] True labelled breaks
I think not many people use it because it's difficult to use.
Having real labels might change that.
Personally, I'd prefer real goto, as I've stated in the past.
Just for the record again, I'm +1 for goto, and +0.5 for labelled
breaks only if we've totally given up on goto.
--Wez.
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 breaksI 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.phpAnd if it's worth anything, +1 from me.
- Steph
----
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
Wez Furlong wrote:
I think not many people use it because it's difficult to use.
Having real labels might change that.
Personally, I'd prefer real goto, as I've stated in the past.
Just for the record again, I'm +1 for goto, and +0.5 for labelled
breaks only if we've totally given up on goto.
FULLACK
--
Hartmut Holzgraefe, Senior Support Engineer .
MySQL AB, www.mysql.com
Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Wez Furlong wrote:
I think not many people use it because it's difficult to use.
Having real labels might change that.
Personally, I'd prefer real goto, as I've stated in the past.
Just for the record again, I'm +1 for goto, and +0.5 for labelled
breaks only if we've totally given up on goto.FULLACK
+1
regards,
Lukas
At 13:43 20/02/2006, Lukas Smith wrote:
Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Wez Furlong wrote:
I think not many people use it because it's difficult to use.
Having real labels might change that.
Personally, I'd prefer real goto, as I've stated in the past.
Just for the record again, I'm +1 for goto, and +0.5 for labelled
breaks only if we've totally given up on goto.
FULLACK+1
No news, -1 to that, +0 to the decision in the Paris meeting.
Zeev
Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Wez Furlong wrote:
I think not many people use it because it's difficult to use.
Having real labels might change that.
Personally, I'd prefer real goto, as I've stated in the past.
Just for the record again, I'm +1 for goto, and +0.5 for labelled
breaks only if we've totally given up on goto.FULLACK
+1
Same here, +1 on full goto. And if not then the PDM result. Labelled
breaks are inadequate IMO.
Derick
Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Wez Furlong wrote:
I think not many people use it because it's difficult to use.
Having real labels might change that.
Personally, I'd prefer real goto, as I've stated in the past.
Just for the record again, I'm +1 for goto, and +0.5 for labelled
breaks only if we've totally given up on goto.FULLACK
+1
Same here, +1 on full goto. And if not then the PDM result. Labelled
breaks are inadequate IMO.
One more time: labelled breaks weren't offered as an alternative to goto.
Why are you bringing this to the forum now?
- Steph
Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Wez Furlong wrote:
I think not many people use it because it's difficult to use.
Having real labels might change that.
Personally, I'd prefer real goto, as I've stated in the past.
Just for the record again, I'm +1 for goto, and +0.5 for labelled
breaks only if we've totally given up on goto.FULLACK
+1
Same here, +1 on full goto. And if not then the PDM result. Labelled
breaks are inadequate IMO.One more time: labelled breaks weren't offered as an alternative to goto.
Why are you bringing this to the forum now?
I am replying to the thread? Is that an offensive or something?
Derick
One more time: labelled breaks weren't offered as an alternative to goto.
Why are you bringing this to the forum now?
Because it's a valid part of the discussion.
--Wez.
In a previous email Steph Fox writes:
could you please re-visit it, evaluate it, discuss it (as opposed
to talking about GOTO, which is unrelated)
Then in this email Steph Fox writes:
nb I think implementing goto/equivalent itself is a fairly bad idea
Says the mouth to the foot, "Pleased to meet you!"
Cheers,
Rob.
.------------------------------------------------------------.
| InterJinn Application Framework - http://www.interjinn.com |
:------------------------------------------------------------:
| An application and templating framework for PHP. Boasting |
| a powerful, scalable system for accessing system services |
| such as forms, properties, sessions, and caches. InterJinn |
| also provides an extremely flexible architecture for |
| creating re-usable components quickly and easily. |
`------------------------------------------------------------'
In a previous email Steph Fox writes:
could you please re-visit it, evaluate it, discuss it (as opposed
to talking about GOTO, which is unrelated)Then in this email Steph Fox writes:
nb I think implementing goto/equivalent itself is a fairly bad idea
Says the mouth to the foot, "Pleased to meet you!"
And if you bothered to look into it, you'd know exactly why I wrote both
things. Please don't waste any more bandwidth than I'm apparently wasting
already :)
This one time, at band camp, "Steph Fox" steph@zend.com wrote:
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?
Seems to be 3rd wheel
Also steph, I cannot mail you @zend.com, I get user unknown error
Kind regards
Kevin
--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
Seems to be 3rd wheel
Also steph, I cannot mail you @zend.com, I get user unknown error
Everyone else's mail comes through OK, so I think that was probably a
temporary issue.
No idea what '3rd wheel' means...
- Steph
This one time, at band camp, "Steph Fox" steph@zend.com wrote:
Seems to be 3rd wheel
Also steph, I cannot mail you @zend.com, I get user unknown errorEveryone else's mail comes through OK, so I think that was probably a
temporary issue.No idea what '3rd wheel' means...
By a 3rd wheel (maybe its an aussie expression) I mean there is already
the same thing in operation already and doing the job well. Any thing
extra would (like another wheel) is superfluous.
Kind regards
Kevin
--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
OK, but there's the option to have two wheels that you don't understand
intuitively or two wheels that you do, and I'm hoping for the two that make
sense to me :)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Waterson" kevin@oceania.net
To: internals@lists.php.net
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 12:13 AM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] True labelled breaks
This one time, at band camp, "Steph Fox" steph@zend.com wrote:
Seems to be 3rd wheel
Also steph, I cannot mail you @zend.com, I get user unknown errorEveryone else's mail comes through OK, so I think that was probably a
temporary issue.No idea what '3rd wheel' means...
By a 3rd wheel (maybe its an aussie expression) I mean there is already
the same thing in operation already and doing the job well. Any thing
extra would (like another wheel) is superfluous.Kind regards
Kevin--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."--
__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com