Hello Wez,
just to continue on this nice argument: Jump reminds me of the worst
addition to c ever: longjump.
marcus
Friday, March 10, 2006, 2:36:56 PM, you 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
>>
>>
Best regards,
Marcus