Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:109750
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAEPJdumtbGieUJ164A9oAuzCNNeLWrT1j3r3Abb8rhF1CuXjiA@mail.gmail.com>
 <5e9e1335.1c69fb81.9a507.b80cSMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
 <CADyq6s+7x=7buNxPDo3202VOUfF4Q2nurebDBbeo2O=x-_gEMQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPg3XxLPSu0BX=K0q9YzYz2T7JX8v5fw2x2EXB3_sQy4eNk-8A@mail.gmail.com> <CAJvSBVMFv72ohH74G66UPtjZfxGw5-8V4Wryqa+LXKJttarWKg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJvSBVMFv72ohH74G66UPtjZfxGw5-8V4Wryqa+LXKJttarWKg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 13:35:11 +0200
Message-ID: <CAEPJdun2hCEB2ub_1sbX6qBXyq6JNBTmE5=Hqj7EwZHswtj58Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Bowyer <phpmailinglists@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Cowburn <petercowburn@gmail.com>, Marco Pivetta <ocramius@gmail.com>, 
	Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>, PHP Internals List <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003cc38305a3cb697e"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [VOTE] Attributes v2 RFC Vote is open
From: kontakt@beberlei.de (Benjamin Eberlei)

--0000000000003cc38305a3cb697e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 12:39 PM Peter Bowyer <phpmailinglists@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 at 09:15, Peter Cowburn <petercowburn@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I know that I'm "too late" to be making suggestions, but I would like to
> > see
> > a new "@@" operator over the proposed <<...>> or @:.
> >
>
> I support this, and agree with Theodore Brown's earlier message (
> https://externals.io/message/109713#109717).
>

The discussion on this RFC was 5 weeks and the syntax suggestions until
yesterday have all been suboptimal.

While the nerd reference of a potential AT-AT operator gives me tickles,
same with the now included smiley alternative @: these approaches have the
downside that they don't have an end token, and are therefore visually
"harder" to spot on declarations (subjective impression). It is my belief
that even with @@ as secondary alternative the <<>> syntax would still
prevail for this reason.

I remember reasonably well how internals exploded when the namespace
operator was selected, everyone was making their own appeal to the syntax
gods for something different.

Please be reminded how this is the 7th RFC on attributes in PHP and on many
of the previous ones the problems came down to syntax, except the
Attributes v1 where <<>> was proposed as well and the implementation
(exposed ast\node, no namespacing) was the primary reason for it getting
rejected.

>
> Peter
>

--0000000000003cc38305a3cb697e--