Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:111217 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 59901 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2020 14:51:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 28 Jul 2020 14:51:00 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0F8D1804D0 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 06:46:55 -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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-oi1-f180.google.com (mail-oi1-f180.google.com [209.85.167.180]) (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 ; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 06:46:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi1-f180.google.com with SMTP id q4so5751561oia.1 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 06:46:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joeferguson-me.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language; bh=EakXhTEDoNR6k0zoL3DKzVne+tq+PUbGpyLp1O0DPXc=; b=fWOew5tEjgQwKl7jye9YXfzqtWELIVlnz1TG5AnnLYSb6YpQ+cj3+f3Fcu8CrDdLTu v9TMHkw6HIsTRb0GKYQF6xY9iwSliHxAJ1+uuaZyy5/egFALE5oHipg/8S6e87BWg+Me gH+6NFLnmPFY7T7TKd5nr/i3reqbISB1I+cZ2B+LopUcBVkyA83bDt9xmiSmP+HKlyeC s2rnPaTF3Y9U0u92zo6duDR+SxsgWU/N0uv9AeZvb+rlIWnyzcSkYJONqDi9286YQuIv mPUCpZNeJbGMh1GSwk/8I0/bFs44g2yLkm9ZAHZXXVvecosi3T5pdLHQu7FuOjCKdhn7 pLbQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language; bh=EakXhTEDoNR6k0zoL3DKzVne+tq+PUbGpyLp1O0DPXc=; b=ksRjzKsHNJOfhpgLYTPhPJ3m4LD6wwAcB3cSLC5/Wt3dkJBj6x3HwW+6qmkfdresCr usBo60b/sclhMbjc2e7eL4On4WGgCkK4IC6VYxO+PDtaoXPRpwvx6Hmr5lIjcwURu92x k9u3z0yWuFoyRupGSPwmK8vF5+2HrwZbCIvxMgfTLFXY8b3R3oSKNxkE/3jkFg0wg3qf iujdkp5tB0EL5exWIPQ2WJYsxV38Tr/KLHoy35vrPXCkNXvREexGrW9GBD6bxROKZTsq C8Wg4mK+xOPoYWFvsWOgOzKnBroYWQWg1+XM+ouxt2lOc/7fzoEWwwMDxDwYVHPF9dYs k8oA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Ym9nDXo9t+9vHBsDAOoIvOzHnakSvn4ZMbeUcoouSh0rYEwKz GkhI7GVRoPbKbkh1VQD9Nlk5TBhoCDz+IA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy6RAjYj7iBCsMtnni6YSGlpFZnHUVCgmGmA4YDIbW8kVBkVMKmMMZN4KimwTR1CXWV7x7I4Q== X-Received: by 2002:aca:cfd0:: with SMTP id f199mr465837oig.102.1595944013900; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 06:46:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.202] (c-75-64-246-197.hsd1.tn.comcast.net. [75.64.246.197]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n187sm280683oif.35.2020.07.28.06.46.53 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 28 Jul 2020 06:46:53 -0700 (PDT) To: internals@lists.php.net References: <5f192da8.1c69fb81.1600e.098eSMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 08:46:50 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------FF5095CBEACAC201B313D332" Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] The @@ is terrible, are we sure we're OK with it? From: joe@joeferguson.me (Joe Ferguson) --------------FF5095CBEACAC201B313D332 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 7/28/2020 08:31, Nikita Popov wrote: > However, with my RM hat on, I need to feel like we're as sure as we can be >> about this syntax before it's public. >> I'm willing to extend an additional period (up to the tagging of beta3, in >> just under six weeks) for a re-vote on the syntax as changing that will be >> less violent of a change than merging the entire implementation after >> branching. >> > So, does anyone plan to pursue this? > > Nikita Yes. I'll have an RFC to announce shortly. Waiting on one last review before sharing here. --------------FF5095CBEACAC201B313D332--