Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:20287
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 10:20:27 +0100
Message-ID: <00A2E2156BEE8446A81C8881AE117F192C1C96@companyweb>
Thread-Topic: [PHP-DEV] Re: PDM Meeting Notes
Thread-Index: AcXwz3WcFcuHJrjtTVuSv0jmYoqahQABV2iw
Cc: <internals@lists.php.net>
Subject: AW: [PHP-DEV] Re: PDM Meeting Notes
From: mp@webfactory.de ("Matthias Pigulla")



> -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Jani Taskinen [mailto:sniper@iki.fi]=20

>      We could start with making it an E_ERR..erm..E_STRICT notice
>      if you use {} with arrays or [] with strings. And really separate
>      them in PHP 6. But does it make any sense?

At least some people here would appreciate it :)

This would be consistent with what has been advised in the past, and =
making [] on strings an E_STRICT is the logical step after deprecating =
it as of PHP4 and before disallowing it in PHP6.

Maybe there's more code out there incorrectly using [] on strings rather =
than using {}, but that doesn't make it more right. And nobody would =
complain about an E_STRICT.

>      Removing {} is ultimately the right thing to do, whatever the
>      anti-purists may think.=20

That is, purism is to have as little different language elements as =
possible at the cost of overloading? At least I agree that [] and {} =
being the same is not pure.

> "{$str{1}}" vs. "{$str[1]}", you decide..

Admittedly this is ugly to read but the same thing on the other side is =
$var[$x][$y] vs. $var[$x]{$y}.

Just as checking if there's more code out there using $x[1] or $x{1}, =
you could check if {} is used more in string contexts or in standalone =
expressions (not seriously).

-mp.

Oh, btw: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_purism: "Linguistic =
purism is the opposition to any changes of a given language, or the =
desire to undo some changes the language has undergone in the past." So =
what do the anti-purists want here? "Anti-purism: A puristic reaction to =
a manifestation of purism, directed at the removal of neologisms =
originating from a puristic intervention."