Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:111238 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 38614 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2020 00:13:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.localdomain) (76.75.200.58) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 29 Jul 2020 00:13:11 -0000 To: internals@lists.php.net References: Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 00:09:11 +0100 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: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Posted-By: 87.81.129.66 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Discussion] Shorter Attribute Syntax Change From: marandall@php.net (Mark Randall) Message-ID: On 28/07/2020 22:55, Theodore Brown wrote: > I appreciate the examples. I think there are good reasons not to > implement these kind of extensions, at least in this form. I'll reply > to each example below. The problem is your argument comes from a position of... because you don't like those examples, we shouldn't make accomodation for them or anything like them in future. Adopting such extensions is a matter for a future RFC, and not for preemptively throwing a spanner in the works. Mark Randall