Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:111467
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <alpine.DEB.2.23.453.2008100935570.7489@singlemalt.home.derickrethans.nl>
 <CABHuAWyyNQ-w8X458OCbQxX5WXLwABhFjv8sFEbwcw1YrG=rhw@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.23.453.2008111320530.7489@singlemalt.home.derickrethans.nl>
 <CABHuAWx_rF=_o7UXmzexKPtzbj_vFRa8sodSOMhe5tS1rtvLiw@mail.gmail.com>
 <BYAPR05MB65351C2A1E0F10B01739DE32DE450@BYAPR05MB6535.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
 <CANS-=pcqwqLjaxmESy91eW-dDDyNrkOhEmOg4nzMPEzddk8X6A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <23598724-b141-3b85-b67c-61fed8a1a14d@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 15:44:09 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CANS-=pcqwqLjaxmESy91eW-dDDyNrkOhEmOg4nzMPEzddk8X6A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Shorter Attribute Syntax Change
From: a.leathley@gmx.net (Andreas Leathley)

On 11.08.20 15:15, Lynn wrote:
> If typability really matters, we should've deprecated the backtick
> version
> to run things. We also seem to forget about readability. @@ makes things
> really hard to read for me as it draws attention, the same goes for <<an=
d>>
> being written as such, with spaces it's fine. In terms of @[] typability=
,
> my IDE auto completes the ] when I type [. After that we have to type a
> word which will most likely require keys on the right side of the keyboa=
rd
> anyway. Sure, typing @@ is easier, for me this is at the cost of
> readability. I read code more frequently than I write it, so I think thi=
s
> should matter more.
>
> Please don't use @@ for annotations/attributes.

I do understand that not everyone likes @@ in terms of perceived
readability, although in IDEs this will probably be less of a problem
(by making @@ less noticeable in terms of colors and contrast).

It seems unfortunate to me that this RFC just seems super hasty in terms
of unfinished discussions and in that it mixes very different concerns -
an ending delimiter is made out to be necessary in terms of language,
although that seems contentious at best and would be something to agree
on first, separate of the actual syntax and how it looks and feels. And
if someone does not like @@ yet would like a different syntax with no
delimiters, there is no choice for that. The @[] syntax is very last
minute, and including the original choice of @: would have also been an
option: at the time it lost against <<>>, but after that <<>> lost
against @@, so the choices in the RFC are obviously chosen to make sure
a syntax with delimiters is chosen, yet sacrificing a proper discussion
(and enable people to think about it more) because of the time
constraints - instead of just delaying it for 8.1 and having the
necessary time to get to the best possible solution.

Just compare the previous RFCs about the attribute feature and syntax
and the current one - the current one does not even explain the BC
breaks the different syntaxes produce, which was otherwise always one of
the more important parts of an RFC, so at best the RFC is incomplete in
terms of its information. As far as I can tell almost none of the
suggestions to amend the RFCs have been taken into account, so the
original discussion about it seems to have been pointless. I am a bit
disappointed to see this kind of process in PHP, especially
"last-minute" before a new major release.