Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:31657
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 64.233.162.227 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=NB+6f4FZgWcyhnuYGXgEDcbz/ITRFYXjDyOBOXhNbpW43YjTLpZMA4Mz5s/wUxcflCohiLkaeqkZqaN5opOrhJZmXTz31QBds0Ogpzpoe/CmoCX2lE96XahmSxCWrZopAgKCqZ+wakx5vUxIlEV95DOrA3enLIvvepoLBzevDeQ=
Message-ID: <fe05d1540708161403r5ec3acfeq66adedcf2965a6dd@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 23:03:52 +0200
To: "Stanislav Malyshev" <stas@zend.com>
Cc: "Gwynne Raskind" <gwynne@wanderingknights.org>, 
	"Christopher Jones" <christopher.jones@oracle.com>, 
	"PHP Developers Mailing List" <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <46C4A085.3070604@zend.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <3B3E836C-A029-4877-97EB-D935E5853C9A@wanderingknights.org>
	 <46C33F52.6040202@oracle.com>
	 <A58F9CDC-ACFB-4703-8813-339C3824659F@wanderingknights.org>
	 <46C4A085.3070604@zend.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Nowdocs revised
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre)

On 8/16/07, Stanislav Malyshev <stas@zend.com> wrote:
> > I didn't get any further, no :(. The decision of whether to merge the
> > nowdocs patch is out of my hands now, since I don't have source karma.
> > However, since the main thing standing in the way of its implementation
> > was concern over the usefulness, your comment is very helpful, and I'd
> > like to open the topic for discussion again on the list, if no one out
> > there has any objection :)
>
> I think we can have it in HEAD and maybe in 5.3 - though it raises
> questions about compatibility (code not parsing in certain PHP versions
> and parsing in others might be a problem).

I don't see a difference between a "fatal error call to undefined
function" and or a parse error. It can go without problem in 5.3.


> Not sure if <<<~ is the best
> syntax - it's definitely not obvious, maybe we could think of something
> better.

<<< was never obvious, there is no obvious string to use in this case
(not obvious for everyone and his mother).

--Pierre