Re: GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)

From: Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 13:42:39 +0000
Subject: Re: GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
References: 1 2 3  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to [email protected] to get a copy of this message 
At 10:03 09/03/2006, Dmitry Stogov wrote:

The last question:
What do you thin about Andi's solution about using "jump" instead of "goto"?


Great! Yet another keyword. PHP keeps surprising the world...


It may make sense, because it is not a full analog of C's goto statement. It


is a limited "goto". It allows jump back and forward, but not INTO loops and


switch statements.


The "break number" syntax will still be available? Otherwise from your words I understand that there is no way of breaking/jumping a lot of nested cycles and still be in a cycle.
I wish I could vote for a better version of Java labeled breaks :(

João C Morais

Zeev Suraski wrote:

jump makes more sense than goto.  We bounced it off in the Paris meeting, IIRC it was fairly popular in case we go down the route of this semantics.

Zeev

At 10:03 09/03/2006, Dmitry Stogov wrote:

Hi,

The solution (2) - "goto only" is the winner.
So in case of no serious objections, I'll commit the "goto.diff" patch in 24
hour.

The last question:
What do you thin about Andi's solution about using "jump" instead of "goto"?

It may make sense, because it is not a full analog of C's goto statement. It
is a limited "goto". It allows jump back and forward, but not INTO loops and
switch statements.

Thanks. Dmitry.

-- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Thread (106 messages)

« previous php.internals (#22280) next »