Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:124512
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Request for opinions: bug vs feature - change intokenization of yield from
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2024 11:35:00 -0300
Message-ID: <B60F1C13-EAE1-4570-9374-8B428E3DADBE@gmail.com>
References: <237f2004-92dd-46e5-9946-91b8c8d97166@bastelstu.be>
Cc: "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@gmx.de>,
 Juliette Reinders Folmer <php-internals_nospam@adviesenzo.nl>,
 PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <237f2004-92dd-46e5-9946-91b8c8d97166@bastelstu.be>
To: =?utf-8?Q?Tim_D=C3=BCsterhus?= <tim@bastelstu.be>
From: deleugyn@gmail.com (=?utf-8?Q?Marco_Aur=C3=A9lio_Deleu?=)


> On 20 Jul 2024, at 11:30, Tim D=C3=BCsterhus <tim@bastelstu.be> wrote:
>=20
> =EF=BB=BFHi
>=20
>> On 7/19/24 00:51, Christoph M. Becker wrote:
>> And frankly, how much code would be affected?  I mean, does anybody
>> actually put a comment between `yield` and `from`?  Is there a case
>> where this may make sense?  "Because we can" isn't a strong argument, in
>> my opinion.
>=20
> I don't really follow this line of argumentation:
>=20
> If folks do not use the syntax anyways, then we do not need to have this d=
iscussion, because the tools can just ignore it existing. That also means we=
 do not need to revert the change in PHP.
>=20
> If folks use the syntax, then reverting the change is a breaking change fo=
r them.
>=20
> So either the revert is not doing anything at all, or the revert is active=
ly harmful. I do not see a situation where reverting the change is a value-a=
dd.
>=20
> Best regards
> Tim D=C3=BCsterhus

The value add of the revert is because time is a moving target. We don't thi=
nk anyone is using it _yet_, given the circumstances that made this happen. W=
ait long enough and the only guarantee we have is entropy.=