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

I feel we're comparing apples with oranges here. Break; is for breaking out of loops. It shouldn't have anything to do with jumping to somewhere else. Let's say *if* PHP supported jumping through the code. The following should then be two different things: while (loop) { goto LABEL; } :LABEL while (loop) { break; } I think the question here is if we want to implement jumping through the code or not. If we do jumping in the code, this should be a full-fledged feature. If not, there should be no jumping. And it should, in my opinion, certainly not change the way break; works. Stanislav Malyshev wrote:

LS>>a scope limited goto will never be close as dangerous for spagetti LS>>code as exceptions already are because they are not scope limited. Exceptions are structured way of handling code flow - you can not get to random points of code with exception, you can get either to enclosing catch or stop the program entirely. Unlike exceptions, goto allows to jump to a random point of code. I don't know what do you mean by "limited" - I see that the consensus among the goto proponents is to not impose any limits on the place you could jump to - because, of course, once you strated to jump around you always can find a use for jumping to any place, if you are creative enough - and I do not doubt creativity of PHP people.