Re: GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)

From: Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 14:56:03 +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

+1 for goto

-1 for jump


Wez Furlong wrote:
My vote is +1 for goto, just because that largely describes what it does and how it is used. I don't mind if it winds up being called jump, I just think it will be easier for people to find it when they need it if it is called 'goto'. 'goto' also comes with all the usual anti-goto propaganda that will help discourage people that shouldn't be using it from using it. --Wez. On 3/9/06, Dmitry Stogov <[email protected]> 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 (#22332) next »