> > > c) I don't think you are creating the necessary switch_free's and
other
> > > frees when jumping out of a scope unexpectedly.
> > >
> >Entirely possible. The tests I've run don't complain but that doesn't
mean
> >something bad isn't happening.
>
Thanks for the pointers, I at least see what I
"Andrey Hristov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Jan Dittmer wrote:
> > Andrey Hristov wrote:
> >
> >> Robert Cummings wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Unmaintainable because of the ability to write cryptic code. There's
> >>> nothing cryptic about:
> >>>
> >>> ...cod
Personally I would never use it myself, as I know of better ways around it
which make more sense to me. But on the other hand if it would help others
then more power to yah. I think the argument of user's abusing it is bogus,
as clearly mentioned in this thread. There isn't a WTF factor, as almo
Hello,
On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 11:43:13PM -0700, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> [...]
>
> Let's for a second skip discussion of the patch itself, because although it
> was an interesting exercise the patch is not production ready.
> However, I think before talking about implementation, we need to decide
Hello Kevin,
On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 09:51:53AM +1000, Kevin Waterson wrote:
> Sorry if this is not GOTO related ;)
> not too sure what list this belongs on, but here it iw
>
> (gdb) run -X
> Starting program: /usr/local/apache/bin/httpd -X
> [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
> [New T
This is from a seasoned users point-of-view:
GOTO is bad -- this is based on experience from the early days of
coding where GOTO was one of the few available constructs and as such,
overly abused. This also stemmed from a time when little formality
existed in terms of coding. Anyone receiving even
This is from a seasoned users point-of-view:
GOTO is bad -- this is based on experience from the early days of
coding where GOTO was one of the few available constructs and as such,
overly abused. This also stemmed from a time when little formality
existed in terms of coding. Anyone receiving even
This is from a seasoned users point-of-view:
GOTO is bad -- this is based on experience from the early days of
coding where GOTO was one of the few available constructs and as such,
overly abused. This also stemmed from a time when little formality
existed in terms of coding. Anyone receiving even
Hello Andi,
That being said, I TOTALLY agree with your 2 rules. Thanks.
Also, by limiting it to local scope and not being able to jump into
an execution block would limit it's ability to make really nasty
spaghetti code -AND- in my understanding provide the desired
"professional" funct
At 09:19 PM 7/30/2004 -0400, Robert Cummings wrote:
On Fri, 2004-07-30 at 21:16, Jason Garber wrote:
> Hello Andi,
>
> Sorry for being unclear on this, but what is the exact definition of
> an "execution block" in this context?
Can't jump into an "if" block or "while" block etc. Only out.
Yep e
On Fri, 2004-07-30 at 21:16, Jason Garber wrote:
> Hello Andi,
>
> Sorry for being unclear on this, but what is the exact definition of
> an "execution block" in this context?
Can't jump into an "if" block or "while" block etc. Only out.
Cheers,
Rob.
--
.
Hello Andi,
Sorry for being unclear on this, but what is the exact definition of
an "execution block" in this context?
Thanks!
--
Best regards,
Jasonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Friday, July 30, 2004, 9:08:09 PM, you wrote:
AG> Hi Jason,
AG> I think that in any
Hi Jason,
I think that in any case, if it is implemented it will have to follow two
basic rules:
a) The goto has to be local.
b) You can't jump into an execution block but only out of one.
Andi
At 09:06 PM 7/30/2004 -0400, Jason Garber wrote:
PG> [snip] i'm somewhat confuzzled why you, of all peo
PG> [snip] i'm somewhat confuzzled why you, of all people, are advocating such
PG> mutilation of do-while(), which is *abuse* of the construct. mutilating one
PG> construct to emulate another construct, which won't be implemented because
PG> it could be abused and mutilated, just doesn't compute fo
- Original Message -
From: "Andi Gutmans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Edin Kadribasic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Zeev Suraski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Jeff Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 4:13 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO operat
Sorry if this is not GOTO related ;)
not too sure what list this belongs on, but here it iw
(gdb) run -X
Starting program: /usr/local/apache/bin/httpd -X
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
[New Thread -1084688640 (LWP 5825)]
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switchi
On Fri, 2004-07-30 at 17:11, Shaun Thomas wrote:
> Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
>
> > The JAVA approach is even superior to PHPs "break n;"
> > where n has to be an integer and you have to be very
> > carefull to not wrap another loop around the break
> > but within the loop supposed to be broken
>
How would you expect the sort function to behave on the following:
array(true, false, 0, 1)?
It is a different way of looking at the same problem and you are likely to
hit this anytime you start comparing/sorting different data types.
In general, I don't think it makes very much sense to fix the c
I prefer using the caching to solve this problem, because according to my
tests, with a fairly small amount of memory, the caching pretty much solves
the problem completely. So I'm thinking that if we go with the approach of
this patch, we can solve the problem with a very small amount of simple
On Jul 30, 2004, at 4:33 PM, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
Jeff Moore wrote:
Where did the if statements go? do_stuff(), do_more_stuff(), and
do_even_more_stuff() should throw exceptions rather than return
boolean error indicators.
Now imagine do_stuff() and friends were native PHP functions ;)
You mi
Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
The JAVA approach is even superior to PHPs "break n;"
where n has to be an integer and you have to be very
carefull to not wrap another loop around the break
but within the loop supposed to be broken
Very true. Labeled breaks would be the "goto" that people seem to want
Jeff Moore wrote:
function pseudocode() {
try {
$a = allocate_resource_z();
$b = allocate_resource_y();
$res = do_stuff();
$c = allocate_resource_x();
$res = do_more_stuff();
$d = allocate_resource_foo();
$res = do_even_more_stuff();
David Kingma wrote:
Where did the if statements go? do_stuff(), do_more_stuff(), and
do_even_more_stuff() should throw exceptions rather than return
boolean error indicators.
Now imagine do_stuff() and friends were native PHP functions ;)
Good point, but should we fix this with a goto operator
>> Where did the if statements go? do_stuff(), do_more_stuff(), and
>> do_even_more_stuff() should throw exceptions rather than return
>> boolean error indicators.
>
>Now imagine do_stuff() and friends were native PHP functions ;)
Good point, but should we fix this with a goto operator or get
Andi Gutmans wrote:
so you are replacing the question "where does it go to"
that can be answered with a string search wiht "where
does it break to"
This one alone justifies at least labeled breaks as
JAVA has them and that are a kind of restricted GOTO
(as you can also break out of an if)
The JAVA
At 10:31 PM 7/30/2004 +0200, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
Andi Gutmans wrote:
[snip]
I didn't say it cannot be done with goto emulation (and abuse of a feature
on par with switch(true)). What I mean is that using the real thing makes
code more readable and maintinable. Add another level of nesting and
Jeff Moore wrote:
Where did the if statements go? do_stuff(), do_more_stuff(), and
do_even_more_stuff() should throw exceptions rather than return boolean
error indicators.
Now imagine do_stuff() and friends were native PHP functions ;)
Edin
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing Li
Andi Gutmans wrote:
[snip]
I didn't say it cannot be done with goto emulation (and abuse of a
feature on par with switch(true)). What I mean is that using the real
thing makes code more readable and maintinable. Add another level of
nesting and do/while becomes even harder to read.
Edin
--
PHP
On Jul 30, 2004, at 10:35 AM, Shaun Thomas wrote:
Paul G wrote:
function pseudocode()
{
$a=allocate_resource_z();
$b=allocate_resource_y();
$res=do_stuff();
if(!$res)
goto err_out;
$c=allocate_resource_x();
$res=do_more_stuff();
if(!$res)
goto err_out;
At 22:53 30/07/2004, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
[snip]
And can you explain why you can't solve this with exceptions in 2 minutes?
And please, stop the 'dictator!' accusations. If whatever came out of my
mouth was immediately implemented in PHP, we'd have libxml2 bundled and
SOAP support built-in (ju
At 09:53 PM 7/30/2004 +0200, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
function pseudocode()
{
$a=allocate_resource_z();
$b=allocate_resource_y();
do {
$res=do_stuff();
if(!$res)
break;
$c=allocate_resource_x();
$res=do_more_stuff();
if(!$res)
break;
$d=allocate_resourc
Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 22:26 30/07/2004, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
On Friday, Jul 30, 2004, at 21:16 Europe/Copenhagen, Zeev Suraski wrote:
My 2c - we shouldn't discuss the implementation in the same context
as whether we should have it, because it moves the focus away from
the source of the problem
Zeev,
First, thanks for the complement ;-).
I doubt most people became great programmers overnight. Most people have
learned with time, often from their own mistakes or mistakes they observed
others doing. Restricting a language can limit how badly you can screw up,
but it also limits what cou
On Fri, 2004-07-30 at 15:13, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> At 03:11 PM 7/30/2004 -0400, Robert Cummings wrote:
> >On Fri, 2004-07-30 at 13:11, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> > > Rob,
> > >
> > > First of all I don't know where you are getting O(n) from because the
> > > operation is O(1).
> > > Secondly, I just don
At 22:26 30/07/2004, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
On Friday, Jul 30, 2004, at 21:16 Europe/Copenhagen, Zeev Suraski wrote:
My 2c - we shouldn't discuss the implementation in the same context as
whether we should have it, because it moves the focus away from the
source of the problem, which is not imple
On Friday, Jul 30, 2004, at 21:16 Europe/Copenhagen, Zeev Suraski wrote:
My 2c - we shouldn't discuss the implementation in the same context as
whether we should have it, because it moves the focus away from the
source of the problem, which is not implementation. We're way beyond
the times when
At 12:13 PM 7/30/2004 -0700, Sara Golemon wrote:
> a) Performance wise the right thing to do is to use static labels and
> pre-compute them during compile-time (I remembered you were aware of
that).
> b) We therefore should not require an additional opcode for goto.
>
I did consider that, but the i
My 2c - we shouldn't discuss the implementation in the same context as
whether we should have it, because it moves the focus away from the source
of the problem, which is not implementation. We're way beyond the times
when we add something to PHP just because we can... I'm not saying we
shoul
+1
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:55:53 -0400, Ilia Alshanetsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Goto is an extremely useful for parsers and makes life much easier when
> dealing with complex error handling situations.
>
> +1
>
> Ilia
>
>
>
> On July 28, 2004 10:12 pm, Sara Golemon wrote:
> > I wrote up
> a) Performance wise the right thing to do is to use static labels and
> pre-compute them during compile-time (I remembered you were aware of
that).
> b) We therefore should not require an additional opcode for goto.
>
I did consider that, but the idea of computed targets (goto "foo$bar";)
souded
At 03:11 PM 7/30/2004 -0400, Robert Cummings wrote:
On Fri, 2004-07-30 at 13:11, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Rob,
>
> First of all I don't know where you are getting O(n) from because the
> operation is O(1).
> Secondly, I just don't understand what the sudden necessity for the goto
> construct is when o
On Fri, 2004-07-30 at 13:11, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Rob,
>
> First of all I don't know where you are getting O(n) from because the
> operation is O(1).
> Secondly, I just don't understand what the sudden necessity for the goto
> construct is when over the years we have barely ever had a PHP devel
"Sara Golemon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >The C# goto is limited: "goto statements can transfer control within
> > >blocks and out of blocks, but never into blocks." Does the PHP goto
> > >implementation have this limitation?
> > >
> > No it doesn't. As I men
On Friday, Jul 30, 2004, at 20:47 Europe/Copenhagen, Andi Gutmans wrote:
No it doesn't. As I mentioned Sara's implementation is extremely
flawed. So yes there is a technical issue here beside a semantic
issue. And the C# limitation might very well apply in PHP too.
From what Sara said in an earli
At 11:56 AM 7/30/2004 -0700, Sara Golemon wrote:
> >The C# goto is limited: "goto statements can transfer control within
> >blocks and out of blocks, but never into blocks." Does the PHP goto
> >implementation have this limitation?
> >
> No it doesn't. As I mentioned Sara's implementation is extre
Actually, the equivalent I meant was the example someone posted
of "do { f(); break; g(); } while (0)". I believe the "goto"
being discussed is a "local" goto, so just about anything you could
do with it can be done today with some sort of ugly while/do/for
sort of structure. Someone who would us
From a linux cookie:
-
Nearly every software professional has heard the term spaghetti code as a
pejorative description for complicated, difficult to understand, and
impossible to maintain, software. However, many people may not know the
other two elements of the
> >The C# goto is limited: "goto statements can transfer control within
> >blocks and out of blocks, but never into blocks." Does the PHP goto
> >implementation have this limitation?
> >
> No it doesn't. As I mentioned Sara's implementation is extremely flawed.
So
> yes there is a technical issue
At 21:47 30/07/2004, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
I did support it, but IIRC a security implications of having it enabled were
also a major concern and perhaps the deciding factor in having this option
disabled.
Right & wrong. Yes, they were security implications, but not inherent to
the feature itsel
On Friday, Jul 30, 2004, at 20:45 Europe/Copenhagen, Marcus Boerger
wrote:
Use error handling functions.
Did you even bother to read the example I was referring to?
Edin
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
At 21:37 30/07/2004, Todd Ruth wrote:
Something doesn't quite seem right to me about a position
that has both of the following assertions:
1) goto should not be available
2) there's already an equivalent of goto available, so
goto is not needed (and it's just fine that people
use the equivale
Hi Marcus,
Marcus Boerger wrote:
> i thought of ignoring all of this thread but you didn't let me.
> Exceptions are neccessary for constructor failure and there is no
> other way to do it.
So what about removing constructors, too?
$object = new class;
if (!$object->init()) die;
(no, this wasn't
On July 30, 2004 02:25 pm, you wrote:
> At 21:19 30/07/2004, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
> >It seemed to me like people have raised numerous valid argument and have
> > even gone as far as to back them up with examples. If you need more of
> > those, then surely the supporters of goto can provide them.
At 02:38 PM 7/30/2004 -0400, Jeff Moore wrote:
On Jul 29, 2004, at 6:30 PM, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
Here are some more programming languages you may wish to discredit for their
goto support.
C#,
The C# goto is limited: "goto statements can transfer control within
blocks and out of blocks, but neve
Hello Edin,
Friday, July 30, 2004, 8:03:36 PM, you wrote:
> On Friday, Jul 30, 2004, at 19:52 Europe/Copenhagen, Andi Gutmans wrote:
Come on. I can't even believe we are arguing about this.
>>>
>>> I really can't believe this "PHP is only for morons" attitude that
>>> comes from time to ti
At 11:37 AM 7/30/2004 -0700, Todd Ruth wrote:
Something doesn't quite seem right to me about a position
that has both of the following assertions:
1) goto should not be available
2) there's already an equivalent of goto available, so
goto is not needed (and it's just fine that people
use the
Stefan,
There are like 4 examples in favor of goto. Of course they are more
concrete than arguments that people can give against goto because they
don't deal with WTF factors and abstract ideas such as coding style and
structure.
And yes, bad coding can be done without goto but I think goto enco
At 21:23 30/07/2004, Stefan Esser wrote:
Hi,
actually so far my only comment on this thing was my ironical mail about
removing try and catch because it is more or less the same as goto.
I think goto is quite similar. There have been no very compelling
arguments in favor. Some of them don't hold
On Jul 29, 2004, at 6:30 PM, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
Here are some more programming languages you may wish to discredit for
their
goto support.
C#,
The C# goto is limited: "goto statements can transfer control within
blocks and out of blocks, but never into blocks." Does the PHP goto
implement
Something doesn't quite seem right to me about a position
that has both of the following assertions:
1) goto should not be available
2) there's already an equivalent of goto available, so
goto is not needed (and it's just fine that people
use the equivalent)
If you really believe "1", shoul
At 20:48 30/07/2004, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
On Friday, Jul 30, 2004, at 19:38 Europe/Copenhagen, Andi Gutmans wrote:
At 01:29 PM 7/30/2004 -0400, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
On July 30, 2004 01:11 pm, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Secondly, I just don't understand what the sudden necessity for the goto
> const
At 21:19 30/07/2004, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
It seemed to me like people have raised numerous valid argument and have even
gone as far as to back them up with examples. If you need more of those, then
surely the supporters of goto can provide them. But let's make the decision
based on technical mer
Hi,
actually so far my only comment on this thing was my ironical mail about
removing try and catch because it is more or less the same as goto.
I think goto is quite similar. There have been no very compelling
arguments in favor. Some of them don't hold because of break "n" and the
few that ar
FWIW, I also think that introducing goto into the language is not a good idea.
Yes, I agree with Wez and Ilia who said that it can be excellent if people
are taught when and how to use it well. Which is exactly why I think it's
a bad idea to put it into a language like PHP - where the "barrier t
On July 30, 2004 02:08 pm, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I'm not saying that. I'm just saying that you should not only think of
> yourself as a user but of everyone (i.e. make sure you put yourself in the
> shoes of others and try and base your position on that). If you think the
> majority of PHP users sh
- Original Message -
From: "Andi Gutmans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 2:08 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO operator
--- snip ---
> I'm sorry but I just don't understand the great need for goto in PHP and
> that is coming fr
Since a few of you have poked me about this thread now...
First, internals@ is the place where we make decisions like this. We
don't poll the "community" or any such sillyness. We use our collective
experience to make a decision.
I personally can easily live without GOTO, but I really don't se
At 01:53 PM 7/30/2004 -0400, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
> b) I don't think internals@ is a reflection of the PHP community.
If this is the case, why are we even bothering to discuss relevant to PHP
issues on this list? If people who read/write to this list do not reflect the
community perhaps we shoul
On 30 July 2004 18:45, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> At 10:32 AM 7/30/2004 -0700, Sara Golemon wrote:
> > > Secondly, I just don't understand what the sudden necessity for
> > > the goto construct is when over the years we have barely ever had
> > > a PHP developer asking for it.
> > >
> > We clearly tr
On Friday, Jul 30, 2004, at 19:52 Europe/Copenhagen, Andi Gutmans wrote:
Come on. I can't even believe we are arguing about this.
I really can't believe this "PHP is only for morons" attitude that
comes from time to time here on internals.
It's not only for morons but the PHP spirit has always bee
Hello Stefan,
i thought of ignoring all of this thread but you didn't let me.
Exceptions are neccessary for constructor failure and there is no
other way to do it. BUT even though goto is needed for non oo
generator code (compiler compilers etc.) it is a dangerous thing
that basically promotes spa
On July 30, 2004 01:38 pm, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> a) Most of the OOP functionality was requested by a huge amount of PHP
> developers I've talked to.
I cannot comment on that as I can't hardly comment on the people you spoke
with. What I personally heard about OO primary request from developers th
At 07:48 PM 7/30/2004 +0200, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
a) Most of the OOP functionality was requested by a huge amount of PHP
developers I've talked to.
b) I don't think internals@ is a reflection of the PHP community. Most
people here fall into the category of very advanced developers. Doesn't
mak
On Friday, Jul 30, 2004, at 19:38 Europe/Copenhagen, Andi Gutmans wrote:
At 01:29 PM 7/30/2004 -0400, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
On July 30, 2004 01:11 pm, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Secondly, I just don't understand what the sudden necessity for the
goto
> construct is when over the years we have barely
At 10:32 AM 7/30/2004 -0700, Sara Golemon wrote:
> Secondly, I just don't understand what the sudden necessity for the goto
> construct is when over the years we have barely ever had a PHP developer
> asking for it.
>
We clearly travel in different circles. I've heard GOTO requested at least
month
At 01:29 PM 7/30/2004 -0400, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
On July 30, 2004 01:11 pm, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Secondly, I just don't understand what the sudden necessity for the goto
> construct is when over the years we have barely ever had a PHP developer
> asking for it.
That can be said for virtually a
> Secondly, I just don't understand what the sudden necessity for the goto
> construct is when over the years we have barely ever had a PHP developer
> asking for it.
>
We clearly travel in different circles. I've heard GOTO requested at least
monthly from a different person each time and have nev
"Richard Mann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I think GoTo is a bad diretion to go in, espetially with the direction PHP
> is currently taking with OOP.
>
Let me respond by telling you what I hear:
"I have no use for goto therefore noone else should be able to use it
On July 30, 2004 01:11 pm, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Secondly, I just don't understand what the sudden necessity for the goto
> construct is when over the years we have barely ever had a PHP developer
> asking for it.
That can be said for virtually any new functionality that was added to PHP.
Looking
> But reading the various posts here, I changed a little my opinion. I'm in
> favor of a goto operator if the "scope" of its labels is limited to, say,
a
> function/method only.
>
And that's precisely how this implementation of GOTO behaves. You can only
jump to a label within the same op array. T
Rob,
First of all I don't know where you are getting O(n) from because the
operation is O(1).
Secondly, I just don't understand what the sudden necessity for the goto
construct is when over the years we have barely ever had a PHP developer
asking for it.
And please guys, don't use C optimization
On Fri, 2004-07-30 at 06:05, Lester Caine wrote:
> Edin Kadribasic wrote:
>
> >> However, I think before talking about implementation, we need to
> >> decide if goto is really good for PHP.
> >
> > As I mentioned earlier, goto is one of the few features that I really
> > missed in the language
Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Personally I see NO advantage to GOTO in a structured language, and
even if it is added I've learnt enough in 30 years to avoid it. Surely
CASE is much safer and naturally 'contained'?
Two words: "State machine"
So what - the database tells me what to run next for each u
Sun is working on a reference implementation based on PHP 5 along side JSR 223.
I am not sure how long it'll take.
Andi
At 12:31 PM 7/30/2004 +0200, Romain Bourdon wrote:
Hi, I'm also interested on this issue...any info about this extension?
thanks
Romain
"Cyruss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans l
Hi there.
I'm one of the many readers of the list but not contributing myself since
I've no knowledge of the
internals of PHP. However I'd like to make the following comments about
'goto', addressed to people opposing its introduction in PHP:
- If you consider the 'good way of writing code', what
Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
> Robert Cummings wrote:
>> C has it
>> C++ has it
>> VB has it
>> Lisp has "GO" which is pretty much the same
>> Perl
>>
>> I'm sure many other too.
>
>Even PASCAL, the mother of "structured code" languages, has it!
Python too! ;) http://www.entrian.com/goto/ ;)
--
Paul G wrote:
function pseudocode()
{
$a=allocate_resource_z();
$b=allocate_resource_y();
$res=do_stuff();
if(!$res)
goto err_out;
$c=allocate_resource_x();
$res=do_more_stuff();
if(!$res)
goto err_out;
$d=allocate_resource_foo();
$res=do_even_mor
Robert Cummings wrote:
C has it
C++ has it
VB has it
Lisp has "GO" which is pretty much the same
Perl
I'm sure many other too.
Even PASCAL, the mother of "structured code" languages, has it!
--
Hartmut Holzgraefe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubs
Lester Caine wrote:
Personally I see NO advantage to GOTO in a structured language, and even
if it is added I've learnt enough in 30 years to avoid it. Surely CASE
is much safer and naturally 'contained'?
Two words: "State machine"
--
Hartmut Holzgraefe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
PHP Internals - PHP
> Develop some wacky construct that you have to use instead... that way, it
> will scare off novice users, and expert programmers will HAVE to know what
> they're doing and know that they really need it before they have to
> implement it. It's along the lines of "make the most dangerous stuff the
>
The main argument against providing the 'goto' statement seems to be to
protect users from themselves.
So, let's analyze the situation. In the languages which provide the
'goto' statement, is this functionality widely abused?
I have used a number of Open Source projects in several different
lang
On July 30, 2004 02:43 am, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> At 04:55 PM 7/29/2004 -0700, Sara Golemon wrote:
> I think there are only two cases where goto is really interesting:
> a) Error handling.
> b) Auto-generating code or compiler compilers (Sterling mentioned these
> two).
c) Anywhere recursive functi
- Original Message -
From: "Jevon Wright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Frank M. Kromann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 6:53 AM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO operator
> Why not make it hard for users to use GOTO in the first place?
how about a --with-mor
Why not make it hard for users to use GOTO in the first place?
Develop some wacky construct that you have to use instead... that way, it
will scare off novice users, and expert programmers will HAVE to know what
they're doing and know that they really need it before they have to
implement it. It's
Hi, I'm also interested on this issue...any info about this extension?
thanks
Romain
"Cyruss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message de
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Hi all,
>
> First allow me to thank you about PHP5 release. Great job !
>
> My question is about the PHP/Java extension. Last year
Edin Kadribasic wrote:
However, I think before talking about implementation, we need to
decide if goto is really good for PHP.
As I mentioned earlier, goto is one of the few features that I really
missed in the language for the past several years I've been using PHP.
We can debate until the end
Andi Gutmans wrote:
[snip]
However, I think before talking about implementation, we need to decide
if goto is really good for PHP.
As I mentioned earlier, goto is one of the few features that I really
missed in the language for the past several years I've been using PHP.
We can debate until the
Hi,
okay lets remove GOTO and of course also remove try,catch. You can
emulate the whole try/catch thing with lots of unreadable do/while/break
statements. So why insert a stupid construct, that can only help the
developers to shoot themself in the foot.
Stefan
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime De
Alle 04:04, venerdì 30 luglio 2004, hai scritto:
> Where do you see the correlation between OOP and the presence/absence of
> "goto"?
It is not for the OOP model by itself, but for a general code maintenability
issue that OOP languages tend to address, while a too powerful goto operator
may cau
> Why give our developers yet another way of shooting themselves in the
foot?
> Or should I say, blow off their leg? :)
Third.
I think GoTo is a bad diretion to go in, espetially with the direction PHP
is currently taking with OOP.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsu
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
