Re: Re: Labeled Breaks (not the G-word)
| From: | Marcus Boerger | Date: | Mon, 28 Nov 2005 19:31:00 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Labeled Breaks (not the G-word) | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-20750@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Hello Stanislav,
cool argument: as long as there are worse features we can add anything? :-))
best regards
marcus
Monday, November 28, 2005, 10:38:35 AM, you wrote:
> IPC>>It seems illogical to put a limit on jumping backwards just because
> IPC>>someone mihgt make messy code. People are perfectly capable of
> IPC>>making messy code regardless of what steps you might make to try to
> IPC>>prevent it.
> This is not correct. Example: if we had pointers (meaning, real pointers,
> like in C) in PHP, the code could be much more messy. If we had custom
> memory allocation control, the code could be much more messy and
> error-prone than now. And so on. There are features that have higher
> potential for screwups. Jumping to random place in the code is one of
> them, like accessing random address in the memory.
> --
> Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Products Engineer
> stas@zend.com http://www.zend.com/ +972-3-6139665 ext.115
Best regards,
Marcus