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. On 2/18/06, Andi Gutmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: "Steph Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "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 > > -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
