Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:111576
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <alpine.DEB.2.23.453.2008041440380.7489@singlemalt.home.derickrethans.nl>
 <CAEPJdumGf0r9Jwb9nBiAEFPoELP4ckx_OJo4HCHhAPgUPEMqQA@mail.gmail.com> <CAAwdEzDpq91NDrWhAqK2UvAOnt8V_QXqs5-bW6Hoo4wgH9iNtA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAwdEzDpq91NDrWhAqK2UvAOnt8V_QXqs5-bW6Hoo4wgH9iNtA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 14:23:05 +0200
Message-ID: <CAEPJdum88zfJH3Rp3xOH9=_CYmpAUW7pBXEBh0r5GuOoKuSEAA@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Alexandru_P=C4=83tr=C4=83nescu?= <drealecs@gmail.com>
Cc: Derick Rethans <derick@php.net>, PHP Developers Mailing List <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000cc91c705ad11d527"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Shorter Attribute Syntax Change RFC 0.2
From: kontakt@beberlei.de (Benjamin Eberlei)

--000000000000cc91c705ad11d527
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 10:59 AM Alexandru P=C4=83tr=C4=83nescu <drealecs@g=
mail.com>
wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 16, 2020 at 12:36 PM Benjamin Eberlei <kontakt@beberlei.de>
> wrote:
> >
> > We have updated the RFC with all (hopefully) of the feedback from this
> > discussion:
> >
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/shorter_attribute_syntax_change
> >
> > Most notable changes are:
> > - A new section with several subsections on the benefits of a closing
> > delimiter / enclosing syntax.
> > - A section on grouping pro/cons
> > - Inclusion of @: as per Theodores request
> >
> > We are looking for further feedback from the community.
>
> Thanks for the work. Looks good.
> An idea.
>
> Would the syntax @<Attr> be able to obtain a "No" on the "Breaks BC of
> valid PHP 7 code" section while still being more or less the same as
> #[Attr] or @[Attr] considering other features?
> BTW, I'm thinking that it's good to have a "No" there.
>
> Sorry if proposing another syntax is making this an even more complex
> problem.
>

It is ok to propose another syntax, at this point in time we are working
around the @ and [] symbols, because of their familiarity with other
languages attribute syntax.

There is probably 100 potential syntaxes that we could use, @<> is a bit
hard on the eyes as is <<>>, so i wouldn't call it a game changer in
contrast to what we have already, so I would rather not include it.

>
> Regards,
> Alex
>
> > On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 3:46 PM Derick Rethans <derick@php.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Out of Banjamin's suggestion[1], I've updated the Shorter Attribute
> > > Syntax Change RFC to reflect that process:
> > >
> > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/shorter_attribute_syntax_change
> > >
> > > Patches and comments welcome.
> > >
> > > FWIW, this has an excemption from the RM Sara as per [2]:
> > >
> > > > * Shorter Attribute Syntax Change
> > > >    - Joe/Derick - Please make sure this RFC moves along and reaches
> > > >      conclusion by beta3, as discussed previously.
> > >
> > >
> > > cheers,
> > > Derick
> > >
> > > [1] https://externals.io/message/111218#111261
> > > [2] https://externals.io/message/111286#111286
> > >
> > > --
> > > PHP 7.4 Release Manager
> > > Host of PHP Internals News: https://phpinternals.news
> > > Like Xdebug? Consider supporting me: https://xdebug.org/support
> > > https://derickrethans.nl | https://xdebug.org | https://dram.io
> > > twitter: @derickr and @xdebug
> > >
> > > --
> > > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> > > To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
> > >
> > >
>

--000000000000cc91c705ad11d527--