Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:100475
Return-Path: <ajf@ajf.me>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 86193 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2017 21:41:31 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 8 Sep 2017 21:41:31 -0000
X-Host-Fingerprint: 82.132.243.106 unknown  
Received: from [82.132.243.106] ([82.132.243.106:22002] helo=localhost.localdomain)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id 82/32-10715-A8E03B95 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Fri, 08 Sep 2017 17:41:30 -0400
Message-ID: <82.32.10715.A8E03B95@pb1.pair.com>
To: internals@lists.php.net
X-Mozilla-News-Host: news://news.php.net:119
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 22:41:23 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:49.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Firefox/49.0 SeaMonkey/2.46
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Posted-By: 82.132.243.106
Subject: [RFC] [Discussion] Operator functions
From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds)

Hi everyone!

Here's an RFC for a small, simple, self-contained feature with no 
backwards-compatibility breaks and which in fact doesn't even touch the 
language's syntax (it's 50%+1 eligible!) but which could make PHP a bit 
more expressive and consistent, especially with potential later 
features. It even has a test designed to impose minimal maintenance 
burden while testing a fairly large possibility space!

Anyway, the RFC in question is this: 
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/operator_functions

Please tell me what you think and suggest any potential improvements or 
anything you think might have been an omission.

Thanks!
-- 
Andrea Faulds
https://ajf.me/