Re: Re: Labeled Breaks (not the G-word)

Agreed; I see no reason to call it break (that makes it even more confusing), and limiting jumps to one direction only is dumb; there is no technical reason to do that. Perl has a "goto" keyword, but it's pronounced "magic goto". We can have a "goto" keyword and pronounce it "limited goto". Bad feelings and anticipated misuse are not good enough reasons to make this feature obscure. So, I'm +1 on the patch with sane names and removed restrictions; Thanks Sara and Dmitry :) --Wez. On 11/24/05, Edin Kadribasic <edink@emini.dk> wrote: > Ilia Alshanetsky wrote: > > Derick Rethans wrote: > > > > > >>- we wanted to prevent spagetti code which you can do by jumping up: > >> > >> "Similarly restricting the construct so that you can only jump > >> down should satisfy people who do not want the ability to jump all over > >> the place." > > > > > > IMO making this limitation puts a serious cramp of the functionality and > > the limiter should be removed. > > I agree, I see no need for this limit. > > Edin >