Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:110375 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 49647 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2020 16:40:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 4 Jun 2020 16:40:56 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07AD718056E for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 08:23:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-qt1-f182.google.com (mail-qt1-f182.google.com [209.85.160.182]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 08:23:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt1-f182.google.com with SMTP id e16so5559994qtg.0 for ; Thu, 04 Jun 2020 08:23:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=benramsey.com; s=google; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=dK+Ncoh5X359u/NHjWXuyP9/JaRoK5pRj3zsYRvyJBc=; b=JTHx0mapGAM8c2EKo0yTbbXg9rUUAXAR1Phgs1M9P1W8PrGKEs6tMFVa+OT2lVnuhP q6K3a7wGWHgD4eF3fXNz/eKPgDAZcugBov/J+OY0jh6dnD7gMWAjGdmfvPgQgBv93saE 6cyH+4iCqUjPEvevuj7kz+em1lD+mad3wUu+eeDvOQKzavyf4EhWlw2Q9wfRXHC5HLQd U7rhHs45ZSzbGMt2Ts6A1bkPTDOe49F2P9RtGCuqWRYQKmM8qQzHddnc9xcPUl5Iijem WUp01bdiOh4su+1mezEaMekOFPJTKHBiwlvbtxgGxJFUofZH9vxTNGpyu0sjkHVo45O8 73eA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=dK+Ncoh5X359u/NHjWXuyP9/JaRoK5pRj3zsYRvyJBc=; b=mnjhb4Uisz0JCrXn7XVd9oW/uUPZ1T9si8NrE+HEFBHGN6W3r+1qFWjCgm6/LZ/IuV IcvdamuWR126MYvD8UY/jgcn8IQ2j+qOU16ClCYp0U6+If8lK4GNMM9yUNBQlQXYz5A/ +YEoyyOA3McSqAE/MqAR/HdHUviadwNQTQhpZ5ffSww07BVcfRcoNpk1ej0mcQKu++FR ERtlfkWIdoDr/cROw8JbEb3cimtpOzPL48TpckMXgKLDgys7euwDcm8hD4abLUodLvCm 1QAl5qfg8drFMtXanyxMkfE6Rh9arY/UooQSpVavC0NATnRKkie9Z69i20P8LYp/Nlpf sK7w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530LU/MT6Yq9EnQ2gpJWahvIFBcwTf+eK8G/qhvDZPz4yw+JvGfc CuvV/MmwZSJLg4bjuYVL8djF9Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyKBWIX8zJx+06IZhbJAC0huW/t2LBY1eZA5e67gsXnMbRNZEVg+fFzYWc01jGJUq9zMvp1Kg== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5301:: with SMTP id t1mr5052813qtn.310.1591284200119; Thu, 04 Jun 2020 08:23:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.10.42.56] (h96-61-170-50.lvrgtn.dsl.dynamic.tds.net. [96.61.170.50]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a5sm4678152qtw.22.2020.06.04.08.23.18 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 04 Jun 2020 08:23:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_638BE180-28FD-4EEB-A1C3-04DC0EEA3DED"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\)) Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2020 10:23:17 -0500 In-Reply-To: Cc: internals To: Theodore Brown References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Shorter attribute syntax From: ben@benramsey.com (Ben Ramsey) --Apple-Mail=_638BE180-28FD-4EEB-A1C3-04DC0EEA3DED Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > On Jun 3, 2020, at 18:54, Theodore Brown = wrote: >=20 > Hi internals, >=20 > I discussed the syntax for attributes further with Benjamin, Martin, > and several other internals developers off-list, and with their > feedback completed an RFC proposing to use the shorter `@@` syntax > instead of `<<>>` for attributes in PHP 8. >=20 > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/shorter_attribute_syntax >=20 > The goal is not to bikeshed over subjective syntax preferences, > but to address several concrete shortcomings related to verbosity, > nested attributes, confusion with generics and other tokens, and > dissimilarity to other common languages. After reading the RFC, I think I=E2=80=99m a +1 on the proposed `@@` = syntax. Glancing at the example code in the RFC, I think this improves = readability (at least to my eyes). Cheers, Ben --Apple-Mail=_638BE180-28FD-4EEB-A1C3-04DC0EEA3DED Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEAREIAB0WIQToXQMR3fpbrPOmEOewLZeYnIwHGwUCXtkR5QAKCRCwLZeYnIwH G365AP9QMGX59nHLkPhnhjTuFLzOo9eQCzhaFE27RP4PXJ5AWwEAmbyb6q6uztfM +dqEjOoyqRU5bf//80JDvjx2DODTgE8= =oOKD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_638BE180-28FD-4EEB-A1C3-04DC0EEA3DED--