Sara Golemon wrote:
...
Your take is spot-on. This isn't an extension of functionality, just a
"numbered breaks with a name" which is something I've heard requested
from several corners (including @zend.com) as a "wouldn't it be nice..."
I wonder if the need for labelled breaks/continues
Sounds good from a syntax perspective... :)
Sara Golemon wrote:
This "break LABEL" construct does exactly the same as "break NUM",
May be I missed something? I didn't look into patch deep.
Your take is spot-on. This isn't an extension of functionality, just a
"numbered breaks with a name" w
This "break LABEL" construct does exactly the same as "break NUM",
May be I missed something? I didn't look into patch deep.
Your take is spot-on. This isn't an extension of functionality, just a
"numbered breaks with a name" which is something I've heard requested from
several corners (inclu
SG>>Actual labeled breaks. Not the break+jump that was proposed earlier in the
I think the idea is OK, though I don't like a syntax. There is a standard
for/while syntax which is used by a lot of procedural languages, and I see
no reason to break it. I see nothing wrong with using FOO: for labe
On 30 November 2005 01:41, Sara Golemon wrote:
> , I'd like to turn the topic to a completely
> different language
> feature which (might) please enough people to get a rousing consensus.
>
> Actual labeled breaks. Not the break+jump that was proposed
> earlier in the
> guise of a break statemen
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
SG>>* Labeled breaks also apply to continue; For example:
yes, I think it's a good way to do it.
oh, totally forgot about that, another strong reason for having
it in parallel to any GOTO solution we come up with
--
Hartmut Holzgraefe, Senior Support Engineer
Ron Korving wrote:
I loved Joao Cruz Morais idea of using the 'as' keyword in this:
while (true) as outer_cycle {
$i = 0;
while (true)
if($i++ == 10) break outer_cycle;
}
might become a bit confusing with
foreach ($array as $val) as someloop {
but that aside i like the syntax :)
Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
I guess I fall into Group B, and I must say that I'd prefer either to
see goto/jump like construct or nothing at all. Be it a crippled
goto/jump or labeled breaks. So, my vote is a -1.
think of not in the context of GOTO but as in
'break _number_;" finally done right'
-
benefit of this patch.
>
> May be I missed something? I didn't look into patch deep.
>
> Thanks. Dmitry.
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sara Golemon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 4:41 AM
> > To: internals@lists.ph
I don't care what kind of GOTO I get as long as I get one.
Right now I only see need for the forward jumping version,
but I don't mind if you could jump backwards too. :)
And I also want VETO on each and every bug report about it. :)
If anyone dares to report a bug with goto
ch.
>
> May be I missed something? I didn't look into patch deep.
>
> Thanks. Dmitry.
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sara Golemon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 4:41 AM
> > To: internals@lists.php.net
> &
On 11/30/05, Ron Korving <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I loved Joao Cruz Morais idea of using the 'as' keyword in this:
>
> while (true) as outer_cycle {
> $i = 0;
> while (true)
> if($i++ == 10) break outer_cycle;
> }
Me too - it's so stunningly obvious to understand at first sight,
compar
> Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 4:41 AM
> To: internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: [PHP-DEV] Labeled Break (nothing at all whatsoever
> to do with GOTO)
>
>
> But first, this word from our sponsor:
> Group A wants anything resembling goto to burn in the fires
> o
I loved Joao Cruz Morais idea of using the 'as' keyword in this:
while (true) as outer_cycle {
$i = 0;
while (true)
if($i++ == 10) break outer_cycle;
}
I think it's really clear and with this syntax you (at least in my opinion)
kinda loose the feeling of needing all caps for a label name
Elegant solution, however, I'd prefer while(true) FOO { }.
while FOO(true) {} looks like a function call...
On 11/30/05, Sara Golemon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But first, this word from our sponsor:
> Group A wants anything resembling goto to burn in the fires of hell
> Group B wants full non-
I guess I fall into Group B, and I must say that I'd prefer either to
see goto/jump like construct or nothing at all. Be it a crippled
goto/jump or labeled breaks. So, my vote is a -1.
Ilia
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.ph
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 02:52:59 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marcus Boerger) wrote:
> Hello Sara,
>
> nice work, clean patch, good solution - thanks! what more can one
> say?
commit? :)
--Pierre
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
Hello Sara,
nice work, clean patch, good solution - thanks! what more can one say?
best regards
marcus
p.s.: I'll have the thousands of replies on this thread on ignore :-)
Wednesday, November 30, 2005, 2:40:32 AM, you wrote:
> But first, this word from our sponsor:
> Group A wants anything
On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 20:40, Sara Golemon wrote:
> But first, this word from our sponsor:
> Group A wants anything resembling goto to burn in the fires of hell
> Group B wants full non-crippled goto or nothing at all
> Group C wants partial goto (non-backward jumping) or nothing at all
> Groups B a
But first, this word from our sponsor:
Group A wants anything resembling goto to burn in the fires of hell
Group B wants full non-crippled goto or nothing at all
Group C wants partial goto (non-backward jumping) or nothing at all
Groups B and C both (generally) want it called either GOTO or JUMP, n
20 matches
Mail list logo
