Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:32682
Return-Path: <indeyets@gmail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 82861 invoked by uid 1010); 6 Oct 2007 19:57:22 -0000
Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net
Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 82846 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2007 19:57:22 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 6 Oct 2007 19:57:22 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=indeyets@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=indeyets@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 66.249.82.236 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: indeyets@gmail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 66.249.82.236 wx-out-0506.google.com  
Received: from [66.249.82.236] ([66.249.82.236:29010] helo=wx-out-0506.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id ED/9E-26050-0A8E7074 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 15:57:21 -0400
Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id s14so1018585wxc
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 12:57:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        bh=A6WAmcVWWCIz+/0M/TfujBxhXb4MgbIcShJe4zmaHJA=;
        b=reuc5kPgraGDUNndz3slXyTU5jRvXh57xGthVCvsof2YDv+zIqn11OcqWfu74yVC3GHEvcifIK3qKkbCBcgo/Uqn0HkQd3ibzjnpMZx1DVx0RV/+Kb4iO0rsFOwk+1qja09uClt7IT6F4MTzwwql66MYDaRQDPchEc50HS8U3J4=
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=PtqcCjy/UeGmqn/b1sOZ3tST/U3Plvd6ErXdDjh+8qBTyX53FTy03BWe4OvdquTttjIl1pBoO+R+dWyQcKGilVNiCqu39qsR4Bj5JGoDMkFllQ6dnqEwfAXWZ0dOWABbxLfm7J4ZnP9DMrqlHS2bhgpuGhrA1wk4zcAvyZb0lc8=
Received: by 10.90.86.10 with SMTP id j10mr1247103agb.1191700638577;
        Sat, 06 Oct 2007 12:57:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.90.84.5 with HTTP; Sat, 6 Oct 2007 12:57:18 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <cd5680a20710061257s664cf6dao120dee1953172b14@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 23:57:18 +0400
To: "Antony Dovgal" <tony@daylessday.org>
Cc: "Larry Garfield" <larry@garfieldtech.com>, internals@lists.php.net
In-Reply-To: <4707D8AA.9060905@daylessday.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <cd5680a20710010430k3a198b0eo98492db66368819c@mail.gmail.com>
	 <200710042005.30734.larry@garfieldtech.com>
	 <285930281.20071006200938@marcus-boerger.de>
	 <200710061338.47307.larry@garfieldtech.com>
	 <4707D8AA.9060905@daylessday.org>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] substr/array_slice in []
From: indeyets@gmail.com ("Alexey Zakhlestin")

I hardly find it too cryptic (it makes some array algorythms much more
readable, actually)

and in this case, having such construction would allow us to implement
array_slice() in userland (which is not true other way round) ;)

On 10/6/07, Antony Dovgal <tony@daylessday.org> wrote:
> On 06.10.2007 22:38, Larry Garfield wrote:
> > I have no love for Perl (and a rather strong dislike of it), but I have to
> > agree with those who say that "looks like Perl" is a lame reason to reject
> > something.  PHP's object system looks an awful lot like Java, too.  That
> > doesn't make it bad.
> >
> > "Too unreadable", "not approachable enough", "too inflexible", etc. are
> > perfectly valid reasons to reject a syntax.  "Looks like <insert language
> > here>" is not, I content, one of them.
>
> I believe it should be pretty clear that "too perlish" means "too cryptic
> and makes no sense because it duplicates already implemented functionality
> (more than one way to do it, yeah)".
>
> But "too perlish" is much shorter.
>
> --
> Wbr,
> Antony Dovgal
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>


-- 
Alexey Zakhlestin
http://blog.milkfarmsoft.com/