On Thu, June 9, 2005 6:49 am, Jochem Maas said:
> Richard Lynch wrote:
>> And, for the record, *I* sure as hell don't want to see a GoTo in PHP.
>
> whats your take on ifsetor()?, personally I would like to see it. I think
> its a great way to teach newbies about checking vars before use (if
> noth
On Thursday 09 June 2005 23:08, Greg Donald wrote:
> On 6/9/05, Jochem Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > whats your take on ifsetor()?, personally I would like to see it. I
> > think its a great way to teach newbies about checking vars before use
> > (if nothing else)
>
> That and error_reporting
On 6/9/05, Jochem Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> whats your take on ifsetor()?, personally I would like to see it. I think
> its a great way to teach newbies about checking vars before use (if nothing
> else)
That and error_reporting( E_ALL );
--
Greg Donald
Zend Certified Engineer
http://de
Richard Lynch wrote:
On Tue, June 7, 2005 10:59 am, Robert Cummings said:
PHP has never purported to be an OOP only language. It advocates both
procedural and OOP programming methodologies. Just ask Richard Lynch :)
Don't bother asking me - Ask Rasmus :-)
And, for the record, *I* sure as he
On Tue, June 7, 2005 10:59 am, Robert Cummings said:
> PHP has never purported to be an OOP only language. It advocates both
> procedural and OOP programming methodologies. Just ask Richard Lynch :)
Don't bother asking me - Ask Rasmus :-)
And, for the record, *I* sure as hell don't want to see a
[snip]
A more realistic speed hit is the fact that using if/elseif/else or
switch statements requires on average an O( n ) lookup, whereas a proper
goto implemention is O( 1 ). Now I'll give you you could do an label to
function map and use that instead, but that's still O( lg n ).
[/snip]
Ah the
On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 14:26, John Nichel wrote:
> Jay Blanchard wrote:
>
> > The speed difference is negligible though, in this day and age,
> > dependent upon how much hair-splitting you would care to do. You're
> > still setting aside a block of code which will have to be parsed and you
> > incu
Jay Blanchard wrote:
The speed difference is negligible though, in this day and age,
dependent upon how much hair-splitting you would care to do. You're
still setting aside a block of code which will have to be parsed and you
incur the same setup if the goto section is the same code as the
funct
[snip]
Absolutely nobody in this day and age advocated "goto ". The
only use to have useful advantage is "goto " and of course
that is where the exists within the current execution scope.
A function call is not an acceptable replacement since you incure the
overhead of setting up the function and
On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 10:50, Jay Blanchard wrote:
> [snip]
> Goto has (I believe) been described as a method of shooting yourself
> in both feet at the same time.
> [/snip]
>
> goto (not a 'new' construct as was mentioned earlier) had its uses, but
> thos would seem depricated now as you can call
[snip]
Goto has (I believe) been described as a method of shooting yourself
in both feet at the same time.
[/snip]
goto (not a 'new' construct as was mentioned earlier) had its uses, but
thos would seem depricated now as you can call a function, which is
essentially what a goto did. Consider;
if
If there is a use for goto, that can cause certain tasks to be
acomplished faster using goto, and that implementing goto in the ZE
isn't too much work, then I don't see a problem with implementing it.
I'm not totally sure why, but Zend used goto, in the Zend Engine(one
used for php4) code for loop
Jason Barnett wrote:
I agree 100% with Greg's comments for the goto() / ifsetor() discussion
on the internals list. As far as speed goes if the dev team knew of
ways to improve specific parts of the codebase (while maintaining the
rest of the features available in PHP) then I'm confident they
I agree 100% with Greg's comments for the goto() / ifsetor() discussion
on the internals list. As far as speed goes if the dev team knew of
ways to improve specific parts of the codebase (while maintaining the
rest of the features available in PHP) then I'm confident they would
make that chang
On 6/6/05, Chris Drozdowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I perused the discussion about the inclusion of "goto" into the PHP
> language on the php.internals list.
Yeah, I've been following it as well.. seems there would be bigger
fish to fry, I dunno. I benched Ruby and PHP doing some simple ran
I perused the discussion about the inclusion of "goto" into the PHP
language on the php.internals list.
From a PHP end-user's perspective, I would suggest that rather than
focusing on adding new language constructs such as goto, that the
development team put 100% focus on making what it alread
16 matches
Mail list logo
