Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
Like case-sensitivity. -Andrei P.S. Joking, I am _just_ JOKING! Have a sense of humor, people. On Mar 12, 2006, at 8:50 AM, Pierre wrote: On 3/12/06, Steph Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lukas, that's extremely odd. Check history! (when most of the core team agreed on jump originally, for a start). I've seen five very vocal pro 'goto's here and NO good reasons given for it. There are several good reasons against. The result of the vote in this thread is clear. No matter what your history says, I think it is time to commit it and move to more interesting topic. --Pierre -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
We already have exceptions, so we don't need another longjump :) jump or goto? Just make common decision and I will change it. Thanks. Dmitry. -Original Message- From: Marcus Boerger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006 1:22 AM To: Wez Furlong Cc: Dmitry Stogov; internals@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion) 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 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
Hello Dmitry, my advice just like Wez' is to name it 'goto' because that is what it is. (to drop the 2nd part that might have confused you). best regards marcus p.s.: To make me happy you'd have to drop the mess Sunday, March 12, 2006, 10:44:19 AM, you wrote: We already have exceptions, so we don't need another longjump :) jump or goto? Just make common decision and I will change it. Thanks. Dmitry. -Original Message- From: Marcus Boerger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006 1:22 AM To: Wez Furlong Cc: Dmitry Stogov; internals@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion) 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. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
Dmitry, maybe I have overlooked a single post, but I have yet to see a single post favoring jump over goto. The common decision is here and it is goto. Lukas, that's extremely odd. Check history! (when most of the core team agreed on jump originally, for a start). I've seen five very vocal pro 'goto's here and NO good reasons given for it. There are several good reasons against. - Steph -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
On 3/12/06, Steph Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lukas, that's extremely odd. Check history! (when most of the core team agreed on jump originally, for a start). I've seen five very vocal pro 'goto's here and NO good reasons given for it. There are several good reasons against. The result of the vote in this thread is clear. No matter what your history says, I think it is time to commit it and move to more interesting topic. --Pierre -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
I'm fine with goto too. At 02:40 AM 3/12/2006, Marcus Boerger wrote: Hello Dmitry, my advice just like Wez' is to name it 'goto' because that is what it is. (to drop the 2nd part that might have confused you). best regards marcus p.s.: To make me happy you'd have to drop the mess Sunday, March 12, 2006, 10:44:19 AM, you wrote: We already have exceptions, so we don't need another longjump :) jump or goto? Just make common decision and I will change it. Thanks. Dmitry. -Original Message- From: Marcus Boerger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006 1:22 AM To: Wez Furlong Cc: Dmitry Stogov; internals@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion) 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. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
Lukas, that's extremely odd. Check history! (when most of the core team agreed on jump originally, for a start). I've seen five very vocal pro 'goto's here and NO good reasons given for it. There are several good reasons against. The result of the vote in this thread is clear. No matter what your history says, I think it is time to commit it and move to more interesting topic. I think I'm tired of being attacked. This is not 'my history'. Ilia, Zeev, Dmitry, and a bunch of other people wanted it to be called 'jump'. If you choose to ignore them because you don't like it, fine, but there's no reason to be nasty with it. It'd be better to give a sensible reason for calling it 'goto' if that's what you want - as far as I can see there aren't any. - Steph -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
Let's just call it goto and be done with it. It seems that for the people who will use this feature goto name will cause the least amount of WTF. Ilia -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
Hello bertrand, just to clearify this, we don't do voting here becuase it is impossible to bring a majority of php users here or decide who is important and so on. Thus we are only doing surveys here even if called voting. And i assume that all people on this list have better things to do than implementing a survey system for undiscussed php features. Instead we stay with our habits and continue to openly discuss things until some of the developers who feel responsible have made their mind and found a consensus. That served us all best in the past. Even if it means that we did not get all the features we wanted or did not get them in the form we wanted. And even if it means that we have to discuss stuff on long threads which includes people who actually have no meaning on a request, just want to say something or even have no idea what is going on soever. The advantage still is that often enough we get good feedback and learn from each other by those discussions. best regards marcus Sunday, March 12, 2006, 8:00:11 PM, you wrote: Can't you g(irl|uy)s install somewhere a right pool so people can simply vote ? With some identification, so you can sort out common people, registered, core, etc... results ? I mean for simple choices e.g. goto|jump|both, otherwise, as was recently proposed, RFC are certainly nice and more efficient when more technical to consider. And not saying discussions here are not interesting. -- toggg Best regards, Marcus -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
Seems the majority prefers goto. I'll change jump to goto tomorrow in case of no serious objections. Thanks. Dmitry. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
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 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
+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 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
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 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
On Thu, 9 Mar 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? I don't really mind... but I wonder why you want to do this? Both work equally well and most people are familiar with the term goto. Derick -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
I am indifferent - goto or jump, but may be others don't. Thanks. Dmitry. -Original Message- From: Derick Rethans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 11:09 AM To: Dmitry Stogov Cc: internals@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion) On Thu, 9 Mar 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? I don't really mind... but I wonder why you want to do this? Both work equally well and most people are familiar with the term goto. Derick -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
Hi, Dmitry Stogov wrote: I am indifferent - goto or jump, but may be others don't. what about `escape`? Thanks. Dmitry. -Original Message- From: Derick Rethans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 11:09 AM To: Dmitry Stogov Cc: internals@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion) On Thu, 9 Mar 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? I don't really mind... but I wonder why you want to do this? Both work equally well and most people are familiar with the term goto. Derick -- Andrey -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
Hi, sorry for sending second email. Another choice could be `leave`, which seems better than `escape` (clashes with escaping sequences). Andrey Andrey Hristov wrote: Hi, Dmitry Stogov wrote: I am indifferent - goto or jump, but may be others don't. what about `escape`? Thanks. Dmitry. -Original Message- From: Derick Rethans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 11:09 AM To: Dmitry Stogov Cc: internals@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion) On Thu, 9 Mar 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? I don't really mind... but I wonder why you want to do this? Both work equally well and most people are familiar with the term goto. Derick -- Andrey -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
At 1141902889, Andrey Hristov wrote: sorry for sending second email. Another choice could be `leave`, which seems better than `escape` (clashes with escaping sequences). I think `leave` has too many connotations with `break` and similar commands, and could be misleading. -- Jon Dowland http://alcopop.org/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
Jon Dowland wrote: At 1141902889, Andrey Hristov wrote: sorry for sending second email. Another choice could be `leave`, which seems better than `escape` (clashes with escaping sequences). I think `leave` has too many connotations with `break` and similar commands, and could be misleading. I don't concur and there is documentation for the language. To get to a language one needs to read a bit of its documentation. In every language I know break leaves the current loop, in PHP it's overloaded that the PC could be set after `n` loops. Andrey -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO and/or BREAK LABEL (conclusion)
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 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
