Hi
2013/4/26 Lazare Inepologlou <[email protected]>:
> This seems like a BC break:
>
> for ( ; ; ) {
> try {
> ...
> } catch (Exception $e) {
> continue;
> }
> }
>
> With the proposed syntax, "continue" will no longer refer to the "for"
> loop.
Well, at the moment "continue" is assigned to only usage in loops, we
also have "break" (switch) which works for both loops and construct,
if break is used inside a construct, thats inside a loop, it will be
seen as a part of the construct, we could change continue to work the
same as that.
--
regards,
Kalle Sommer Nielsen
[email protected]