Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:111435 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 71974 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2020 14:59:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 10 Aug 2020 14:59:19 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 027FD1804AA for ; Mon, 10 Aug 2020 06:58:30 -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_NONE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-wm1-f53.google.com (mail-wm1-f53.google.com [209.85.128.53]) (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 ; Mon, 10 Aug 2020 06:58:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-f53.google.com with SMTP id 184so8473961wmb.0 for ; Mon, 10 Aug 2020 06:58:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=beberlei-de.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0528Ex9LEXEcPO6qslwO2cQTSyDPobimFZqZt2yhd30=; b=wdMDZQ98DfJQ8R51d6ze4lc/bpKlONZWiPzFIrQMRK5jTdQuM5vs982zldkO+F2/S7 eTgSrmApFalyR5wCyA+ZHCKX/FjNd0aLM2QZWzAuwB9/q+PAvyNyuqtpFF4BGxu6kVGZ S+hJJ0hrmGE4F42zh64Qh3ub3vt2AVMl5rVp2knl9m+Q9/coJNy+Tnfg9X8EjP28hTOv iar4c/ZLO8dFbNi+dxOgFevWiJovLuQJxJOZAA0Ql7RSnOgFZhNgucjtNFTgcopNuEtV zLONWkXqwQQHCCHkJ8dq8ZzuLWs8fob7oKp7EUaOAWp5m9YayrXLD4lSKEHQtg7lF2EF 1D9w== 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=0528Ex9LEXEcPO6qslwO2cQTSyDPobimFZqZt2yhd30=; b=tvbQXYzmel1P0bnXEGzasyKcKLt3X8EZ+1GP6GHBSdxr2zraF5JizgB139A7vXU0Hg ZO7yqB3YAQ/UBY56Jc3gXLdHzwyu/vVF3VoWljiJAljaB3HJUxfE5iz1eHWUpg94G0mB PabFncE4aVoAcj5IvjcY2yGW0SDId6m1x4t3vZQSTv8/CzwLyf5JEKyGwTgEwGsPCC3a KFzWJWfTisyO77Zx4nkCfKlRhOm3UQYB3chNxxKaOthPK40Uh0ABhgnfJm4k8HD4ZMFV lIrAY9r0frgD5BOrVMlRaubWWeopDX4QDhhJQcObygUaGLzbJGviVYW6X4kWKwh1ITnb YUaw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533YVpAu9flErfDzphz7sXdq1S8oRvjlrybY9Q6XOR1HcRU2OJPn H86NdNQD23S6DMf8NhEzU9Z8NGgjhSbLWBHnP5tGRg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyJcSYxoaihPNPT1gXFPDygMCnVwns8LIHUXzBRb0YytfhAuUpAN5s6kF79Oongmb38NZyXCVXe7O6SbYjWulo= X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:410b:: with SMTP id j11mr26599939wmi.38.1597067908437; Mon, 10 Aug 2020 06:58:28 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 15:58:17 +0200 Message-ID: To: "guilhermeblanco@gmail.com" Cc: Rowan Tommins , PHP Developers Mailing List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005d6ee505ac865937" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Shorter Attribute Syntax Change From: kontakt@beberlei.de (Benjamin Eberlei) --0000000000005d6ee505ac865937 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 3:52 PM guilhermeblanco@gmail.com < guilhermeblanco@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > One question I'd like answered is that, like me, a few people have > voted NO on the question to re-vote the syntax. > If that is true, shouldn't their first primary choice be implied to be > <<>> instead of anything else? I see 7 votes for no, but I'm the only > one that still kept the first voting choice as <<>>. > At this point voting NO on the primary vote means that you are either: 1. are not ok with revolting this late in the release cycle 2. want to keep @@, because this is the current syntax (not <<>>) > On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 9:40 AM Rowan Tommins > wrote: > > > > On Mon, 10 Aug 2020 at 14:08, Benjamin Eberlei > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 11:28 AM Peter Bowyer < > phpmailinglists@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> I have voted no because I asked a question about the ending delimiter > and > > >> why () didn't count. Another person asked a similar question and > neither > > >> of > > >> us got a reply. > > >> > > > > > > () does not count as ending symbol, because it is not required, as such > > > its not an ending symbol. > > > > > > > > > The question asked was that _if the parentheses were made mandatory_, > would > > this provide the same benefits ascribed to the other syntaxes? > > > > To avoid repeating myself, here are the previous posts where I elaborated > > on this question: > > > > * https://externals.io/message/111312#111342 > > * https://externals.io/message/111312#111354 > > > > > > Regards, > > -- > > Rowan Tommins > > [IMSoP] > > > > -- > Guilherme Blanco > SVP Technology at Statflo Inc. > Mobile: +1 647 232 5599 > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php > > --0000000000005d6ee505ac865937--