Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:32712 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 15698 invoked by uid 1010); 9 Oct 2007 09:12:07 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 15683 invoked from network); 9 Oct 2007 09:12:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 9 Oct 2007 09:12:07 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=tony@daylessday.org; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=tony@daylessday.org; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain daylessday.org designates 89.208.40.236 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: tony@daylessday.org X-Host-Fingerprint: 89.208.40.236 mail.daylessday.org Linux 2.6 Received: from [89.208.40.236] ([89.208.40.236:59594] helo=daylessday.org) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id F8/96-04247-4E54B074 for ; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 05:12:06 -0400 Received: from [192.168.3.38] (unknown [212.42.62.198]) by daylessday.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA2B0640163; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 13:12:01 +0400 (MSD) Message-ID: <470B45E1.1030403@daylessday.org> Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 13:12:01 +0400 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070801) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Ford, Mike" CC: internals@lists.php.net References: <93ED589E60BA254F97435FE6C97F2C672DE125@leedsmet-exch1.leedsmet.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <93ED589E60BA254F97435FE6C97F2C672DE125@leedsmet-exch1.leedsmet.ac.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] substr/array_slice in [] From: tony@daylessday.org (Antony Dovgal) On 09.10.2007 12:48, Ford, Mike wrote: >> Yes, I see this quite often in the list: "let's invent a new thing >> instead of an old thing, that would make peoples' life easier". >> >> But you forget that both the old and the new thing would co-exist >> and people would have to learn BOTH, which definitely doesn't make >> any life easier. > > You have to be joking!!! > > People would only *have* to learn one -- whichever they prefer to use. Well, if you live in a hole and never come out of it - yes. But when you start looking into other peoples' code.. bummer. Then you discover that your hosting doesn't use bleeding edge PHP version.. bummer. And then you open your old code and.. bummer. > You'd get some people routinely using one, and others routinely using the other -- > but *all* of them would be happier using the version they prefer, instead of half of > them being pissed off at having to use a crappy unreadable function call instead > of a nice, readable alternative syntax. (Just MHO, of course.) Right, so let's force other people to learn crappy unreadable syntax duplicating nice and clear function call. I believe our resources are too limited to spend them so carelessly. Instead of adding more and more new features, you'd better spend some time on debugging the ones we already have. -- Wbr, Antony Dovgal