Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:111141 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 18876 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2020 02:06:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 23 Jul 2020 02:06:32 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE0091804F2 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 18:01:06 -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=3.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-lf1-f52.google.com (mail-lf1-f52.google.com [209.85.167.52]) (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 ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 18:01:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-f52.google.com with SMTP id u12so2388682lff.2 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 18:01:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FT8Hbi2RscCVIgFBPqpD1WsPEjaDNwijklXb0zQtc0I=; b=egWZocqZ4Ls8oYPJSXXUjM78PY4GgvZaU8ES7fFs3ZowUpMyyvFbb0cWXHyvnigMPn 5HOrkSIlBO3XnyWCKm7vAaE1w44PxUkSxrN+zl00/lunqD+R4/Cdj7cQaut0sjV5MJir VdSjJU1fSF+LVQ8jiwxg8dTpSTXPzYPT60NRsdihl2t1MMGrpEMsbdcXQBz1HfoNbizW hbzl+27l/y2Oao0wv2zIYRzQYGCMye/qMbDwFyix+7z6BezhL3FwQuN/a8iput+Qo4O/ DPmsHe9oyzBIVle1Uw0l+aMV6VJI/VZk0/bIq1JDp+lfjGmAf+jxJagJxUZ/42s7PpvL EoPA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530b7/G4TYT7r1mAuWtd/Lx3S+iztaACUH1P63j8UygXK8uGu6yZ szJNtbgwZKPLRh2jOpZ0VvX9SZ0kuZXvMAEQTV/6I/YD X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzj80e5i7jiBXeXzkO1Hvky0vkJzXZvVtOkLPREff7Vc+tOdhadratV4Gr6+XJmIOWnzmcHYGzrcToox3mbxlw= X-Received: by 2002:a19:8505:: with SMTP id h5mr948858lfd.7.1595466063673; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 18:01:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 20:00:52 -0500 Message-ID: To: Derick Rethans Cc: PHP Developers Mailing List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000fa171c05ab116320" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] The @@ is terrible, are we sure we're OK with it? From: pollita@php.net (Sara Golemon) --000000000000fa171c05ab116320 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 4:29 PM Sara Golemon wrote: > Citation Needed. > > The '@' token and the T_DOUBLE_AT token come from the lexer as distinct > values, where is the conflict? > > I'm not doubting that there is one, you're quite clever, but at the moment > you're stating facts not currently in evidence. > > So evidently, this is specifically an issue with attributes in places where a portion of their name could be mistaken for a type. AIUI, that's being addressed. So the complaint is "what if moar ambiguity?" ? Seems like we're trading a lot of ambiguities. @@ might be a double error suppress (and might spill over types) #[..] might be a legit comment <<...>> might be a freaky combination of bit shifts Regards the vote; I don't believe that @@ has been proven unworkable, however if I'm wrong about that, then the second choice selection from the last vote would obviously take precedence. -Sara --000000000000fa171c05ab116320--