Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:111536 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 88042 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2020 13:00:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 15 Aug 2020 13:00:24 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24CB61804B4 for ; Sat, 15 Aug 2020 05:00:47 -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=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,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-lj1-f171.google.com (mail-lj1-f171.google.com [209.85.208.171]) (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 ; Sat, 15 Aug 2020 05:00:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-f171.google.com with SMTP id w14so12603989ljj.4 for ; Sat, 15 Aug 2020 05:00:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=8dK8AAsFkpRsrKJwAXTul1oUuaiRk83Hii2MkIFgD5I=; b=KkoI2UkuhcWmozDQJCHHa586+Rk3kEn9+/h+IUnEm5vh55m/9Ny/j0bAebXGasppLn o2qJDeBVFfv/9L8cO2DEEue9mCpfKWnn2fMUyS4WnbksRmFnVy52x3IK8rRA3verxApk /KvS9dL7DOUUg96jljaMbejxqiDhrNXefu0OSwvJU1tyrY0fNFzPSDm2iuynyEyXWcTj pDeUD3rjqctBQnVsgU4F8GvQ2k9Mv16csYE5ROlItMaNq8xhqNSYuYbXOzztIpe6DBkk bERO6rOwyEGL6B0mm33MDYXqy12guQFHlhYfxa7KlaVhA6FGmmap+7RBQEKtZUaOmLEq Yzhw== 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=8dK8AAsFkpRsrKJwAXTul1oUuaiRk83Hii2MkIFgD5I=; b=fQbH/xCqnu7SAy7CWUQMP7gA/Gj13Yo0wxdYjETzF33Rk/1bC4+g7oinALAx2qNZ9y XiiKOpkkk1IT9CKHb2M+yg9Ybbo5nlM+NX4EmLvBUG3mpc9mI2N9CmjE+HRtazWfgGiX 4uO+bL/TxNv5HIrI2Dl5at6uDNK0fC+PuotqVmZEakL4/aR+90Fx1sk+jo60bbPBLGhv VoBA/Ot3x64wdBf0r13Upw8W7h3c/AB+Ym6lslv25K98V+B8+FfFTjbxURIW8OqtnNrG L3COXAT3yEPFY+QRBhze8uD9/lGp9BNeGqc7XaWO4rDU6kjqj/EanOpUD1CzJYWSowxc OMSg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533tltnaknSqBNNU0Ll7whhEyJk5hbUZd6vx5l7Wkc0bGY6qkWNp GAiETDA8TbWbNX02T57Y7ia1B/iBdQqL5BkL2q0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwKy0tixL+y2pN/gmG/v2yPDESiegBonRl242UKXlQWR27KZJC2DkDw6lZDTuoqpH+pwCUp3i5XxJLR8pRwbJw= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:7c18:: with SMTP id x24mr3242777ljc.402.1597492844909; Sat, 15 Aug 2020 05:00:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <5cc837df-ab47-628a-d29b-46d7933be973@gmx.net> <3A7CECC3-CDEE-4852-BF4B-4EC7CA1BD538@pmjones.io> <65503c70-e0f0-19b0-0e9e-8b1321510a46@telia.com> In-Reply-To: <65503c70-e0f0-19b0-0e9e-8b1321510a46@telia.com> Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2020 15:00:32 +0300 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_Larsson?= Cc: Derick Rethans , Sara Golemon , Theodore Brown , Benjamin Eberlei , PHP internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008d5ab905ace94962" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Shorter Attribute Syntax Change From: benas.molis.iml@gmail.com (Benas IML) --0000000000008d5ab905ace94962 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Aug 15, 2020, 2:53 PM Bj=C3=B6rn Larsson wrote: > Den 2020-08-14 kl. 21:23, skrev Derick Rethans: > > > On Fri, 14 Aug 2020, Sara Golemon wrote: > > > >> Derick was trying to be good and meet my beta3 deadline. > > And I even got that date wrong by a week. Oops. > > > >> Fortunately, I gave him that deadline (while thinking RC1) knowing > >> some kind of bullshit like this would come up and LO AND BEHOLD here > >> we are. So the good news is that we actually have a spare two weeks. > >> On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 7:22 AM Theodore Brown > >> wrote: > >>> 2. Include a ranked voting option for @: and mention its pros and > >>> cons (it is equally concise as @@ with no BC break, but is somewhat > >>> harder to type). Patch link: > >>> https://github.com/theodorejb/php-src/pull/1 > >> Glancing at beberlei's reply, I do agree that @: is coming slightly > >> out of left field. However, we're using a STV system, so might as > >> well go wild with the options (within reason). HOWEVER, any option > >> included is going to need the same care applied as you outline in #3 > >> and #4 below. > > I would like to point out that as the main premise of the RFC was that > > the chosen syntax had no ending delimiter, I would say that any new > > suggested syntax should have one before I would be willing to consider > > adding it. > > I think that lack of ending delimiter is not a good enough reason to > exclude the @: syntax from the RFC and voting. Would be good to > have the community view on this in order to put this to rest! > No, the community view does not matter here. Including `@:` would go against the core values that this RFC is proposing: an attribute syntax that has an ending delimiter. > We have the @@ syntax in the voting and of course that's natural. > We have it in the voting poll since it's our current syntax; there are no other reasons. Still adding the @: option would in my eyes give a more complete > view of feasible syntax choices. The far fetched ones should not > be included of course. > Which would go against the entire premise of this RFC. If someone wants `@:`, he/she should create separate RFC. > r//Bj=C3=B6rn L > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php > > --0000000000008d5ab905ace94962--