Re: Something (was: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Labeled Breaks (not the G-word))

From: Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 23:02:25 +0000
Subject: Re: Something (was: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Labeled Breaks (not the G-word))
References: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to internals+get-20685@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
I totally agree with you Zeev, your concerns are justified and I appreciate very much your concerns; they confirm PHP is not going to become yet another language with tons of useless features. Nevertheless, my opinion is that goto is not a complex language feature. It occurred to me quite a few times that no other solutions were more elegant than goto. It was tough to accept (I'd been told since I started learning to program that goto was inelegant) but I had to face the facts. On 11/27/05, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> wrote: > > At 22:18 27/11/2005, Nicolas Bérard Nault wrote: > >Goto exists in C. If you affirm that goto should > >not exist in PHP because it gives the > >opportunity to screw their code to programmers, > >are you also affirming that C programmers are smarter than PHP > programmers ? > > I wouldn't make any statement regarding the > intelligence level of C and PHP developers, since > there are plenty of idiots and smart people on > both camps; It has everything to do with > training and experience. And the training and > experience levels of the average PHP developer is > nowhere near that of the average C/C++ developer. > > Sorry for repeating it for the 1001st time in the > few years, but PHP did not get to where it is > today because we added everything and the kitchen > sink, that's Perl. I would *really* be great if > people realized that PHP the way it is now is > successful, but it's not inherent to the PHP > project. Not every bunch of features we pack > under the name "PHP" will retain this level of success. > > We *can* screw it if we go in the wrong > direction, and adding redundant features which > are useful in rare cases and much more likely to > be abused than to be properly used is a good step > in that direction. A lot of people are saying we > already went too far with PHP 5, and that's > arguable. It's clear, however, that adding more > and more language features and making PHP more > and more complex is not a good recipe. > > Zeev > > -- Nicolas Bérard Nault (nicobn@gmail.com) "Maybe nature is fundamentally ugly, chaotic and complicated. But if it's like that, then I want out." -- Steven Weinberg (prix Nobel de physique, 1979).

« previous php.internals (#20685) next »