Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:114332 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 64758 invoked from network); 10 May 2021 09:31:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 10 May 2021 09:31:51 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B55D1804B5 for ; Mon, 10 May 2021 02:39:19 -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-io1-f46.google.com (mail-io1-f46.google.com [209.85.166.46]) (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 May 2021 02:39:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-f46.google.com with SMTP id p11so14117091iob.9 for ; Mon, 10 May 2021 02:39:18 -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=dWC/nrl/x4qFIc4YAvm+3clxljsrkBNC7thIGCj97rs=; b=thmzWQbaMeCCizqVFoWWqpNGF0u8+0K8SwUPWwO4lzS9C4IX6ar5dmvL4hQR9RjW2e LMVVjOGiGrT88Cwg4NsgPyTiRomTB2X508FzNZGopYpTSI07iFiKNr3XuEKXYiN/NDEc B32yRfnUtKAESCxvVevZ0oHYjHLke3nEIjoBZvpx9vnNHrTW7pX+DzWBr9KLk1BIxWen zRnrmmvvbiPWPR3Oca3ZaP/YM3qbNtTQ3wY9GXiJMe7WNS/Nsi1vGytBHYkMHSFvBCf8 NieMSLuYg7pTpA4KkVrhQmTxOtRijP0zbx9maGfylCtnjvCFzclx26VKv/j2hXYSEojF QBpQ== 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=dWC/nrl/x4qFIc4YAvm+3clxljsrkBNC7thIGCj97rs=; b=uOnix2KdCX3KO0icxGKokSQqDXOR88tcB7CdBvRsjXBGz/Xs+iI7SXZ9FScAUtBShJ L9tLEPke3lFif9c70tKJYblXCfBxynQknuLwd6mU43e+Kf36dfIqLI5sl7P9Vk5R4Ct8 NiPRY7oD3SEHXqEB/IqyzCYvBTw5wrzf9imTgT5NSOj/VJS7q+DhGG3xgFNwzbsphfBH IExhkuDZK0gwIHv7txIyiAcNjL7WtLZgXFzo0T5ZssIH0wbWt8lxzlQq4VQym87sAYQ/ Q13w/ZwDbniKaf838p5iivC/d4HDr1lS+aYgXCskQqElkWR6hJXf6Xj2S6sH5X5LDPrM FkCQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530IzUyR1PxCniEH5CuM+IOWYkjUo4hLIOwo9//MeOykcKtz0SYq XHd/Ivgb5ynotzvisqXEc09zKofmxzwqkqf2uRQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyrfkn1hXcGtVCew/l40+A3OcN+g0y2J54bOXLYG2EaGF1cyzdShPQXirx7nwT1cUPhWtR5rb5Lkvbspyk6pE4= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:7413:: with SMTP id s19mr16928314iog.151.1620639556986; Mon, 10 May 2021 02:39:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1620635361.9147.0@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 11:39:05 +0200 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?Q?Mat=C4=ABss_Treinis?= Cc: PHP Internals List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001a6cad05c1f68dd0" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Draft] Body-less __construct From: ocramius@gmail.com (Marco Pivetta) --0000000000001a6cad05c1f68dd0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hey Mat=C4=ABss On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 11:12 AM Mat=C4=ABss Treinis = wrote: > I don't necessarily agree with this point in particular - I mentioned PSR > just-by-driveby, since whoever does follow that convention will face this > issue - but the scope of the proposal is not limited to PSR adopters. It'= s > also worth pointing out that PSR is not an "official" coding guideline fo= r > PHP, and therefore we should probably not limit the scope to it, simply > because regardless if the brackets are on the same line or not, they are > still there. > > IMO, this is a language issue - topical, cosmetic, and minor - but > language issue nevertheless, in fact, exactly like the one had for > attribute syntax. > > Let's gather some feedback and see. > At language level, `{}` is pretty much "no body" - it's more of an optimization pass for OpCache at that point. Adding AST always comes with major complexity for all the ecosystem: since there is AST isomorphic to the proposal, and it's literally one character in difference, I don't see a clear advantage. Marco Pivetta http://twitter.com/Ocramius http://ocramius.github.com/ --0000000000001a6cad05c1f68dd0--