Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:111111
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\))
In-Reply-To: <CAEPJdumWHMr0aVkZtKC_+HA57CcYcm90gCuhvgWeTdd8extH8A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:49:48 +0200
Cc: PHP Developers Mailing List <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <0E082DE8-6862-44AC-A398-D43B8806DB8D@stitcher.io>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.23.453.2007221247530.7489@singlemalt.home.derickrethans.nl>
 <CADK1yXJTUwQ-5NCuPampdLqyfeHatw0=FTXZVeLt+oK67RSBNw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEPJdumWHMr0aVkZtKC_+HA57CcYcm90gCuhvgWeTdd8extH8A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Benjamin Eberlei <kontakt@beberlei.de>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] The @@ is terrible, are we sure we're OK with it?
From: brendt@stitcher.io (Brent Roose)

Doesn't it make the most sense to re-vote the syntax? I'd consider the =
previous vote to be invalid given the parsing issues that weren't listed =
in the RFC.

A re-vote seems the most fair: if the majority still prefers @@, then so =
be it. Otherwise the syntax changes once again, before feature-freeze. I =
suppose the RMs should have a final say in this descision?

Kind regards
Brent

> On 22 Jul 2020, at 14:46, Benjamin Eberlei <kontakt@beberlei.de> =
wrote:
>=20
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 2:40 PM Deleu <deleugyn@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
>> "Terrible" is the amount of humans having their lives taken by a =
pandemic.
>> This is at most slightly inconvenient for you. The aggressive tone in =
this
>> discussion is extremely unnecessary.
>>=20
>=20
> After the RFC was voted on for @@, objectively "terrible" (or bad) =
reasons
> for this patch have been found though, that can only be softened by
> changing token parsing for namespaces.
>=20
> This is not a subjective opinion.
>=20
>=20
>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 2:00 PM Derick Rethans <derick@php.net> =
wrote:
>>=20
>>> Hi all,
>>>=20
>>> I know we've voted twice on this already, but are we really sure =
that
>>> the @@ syntax is a good idea?
>>>=20
>>> - There are lots of grumbles, both on here, room 11, as well as in =
the
>>>  wider community =
(https://www.reddit.com/r/PHP/comments/hjpu79/it_is/)
>>> - It has the distinct possibility to cause further parsing issues, =
akin
>>>  to what ended up happening with what Nikita is addressing at
>>>  https://wiki.php.net/rfc/namespaced_names_as_token
>>> - There is no "end symbol" to make finding occurences easier.
>>> - It is a syntax *no other language* uses.
>>> - @ is never going to go away, so the possibility of @@ moving to @ =
is
>>>  also 0.
>>>=20
>>> Please, let's do the sensible and use the Rusty #[...] syntax.
>>>=20
>>> cheers,
>>> Derick
>>>=20
>>> --
>>> PHP 7.4 Release Manager
>>> Host of PHP Internals News: https://phpinternals.news
>>> Like Xdebug? Consider supporting me: https://xdebug.org/support
>>> https://derickrethans.nl | https://xdebug.org | https://dram.io
>>> twitter: @derickr and @xdebug
>>>=20
>>> --
>>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>>> To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>=20
>> --
>> Marco Aur=C3=A9lio Deleu
>>=20