Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:34760 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 33751 invoked by uid 1010); 12 Jan 2008 11:41:45 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 33736 invoked from network); 12 Jan 2008 11:41:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 12 Jan 2008 11:41:45 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=helly@php.net; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=helly@php.net; spf=unknown; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 85.214.94.56 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: helly@php.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 85.214.94.56 aixcept.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [85.214.94.56] ([85.214.94.56:50531] helo=h1149922.serverkompetenz.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id CF/A9-52119-877A8874 for ; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 06:41:45 -0500 Received: from MBOERGER-ZRH.corp.google.com (146-219.0-85.cust.bluewin.ch [85.0.219.146]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by h1149922.serverkompetenz.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6FC61B3663; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 12:41:44 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 12:41:18 +0100 Reply-To: Marcus Boerger X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1694323444.20080112124118@marcus-boerger.de> To: Sam Barrow CC: Olivier Hill , internals@lists.php.net In-Reply-To: <1200078545.12559.10.camel@sbarrow-desktop> References: <1200066425.7376.9.camel@johannes.nop> <1200075842.16083.44.camel@johannes.nop> <1200077257.12559.7.camel@sbarrow-desktop> <1200078545.12559.10.camel@sbarrow-desktop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] SUMMARY: Array syntax From: helly@php.net (Marcus Boerger) Hello Sam, and here goes the problem, some people here understand the issue a bit better than others and some people actually do the work because they can and are being respected for - just by their experience... Either way there is a clear functional difference. The old array style syntax looks like a function call, or a contructor. The new one makes one thing clear, you will get an array. marcus Friday, January 11, 2008, 8:09:05 PM, you wrote: > On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 14:06 -0500, Olivier Hill wrote: >> On Jan 11, 2008 1:47 PM, Sam Barrow wrote: >> > >> > True. No one's vote is worth more than anyone else's, everybody should >> > have equal say. Some people may know more about the PHP core, but we are >> > all users and developers. >> >> Not when some write anything about everything without knowing anything >> about nothing (makes sense?) > True, however with something like this, it is simply a matter of > opinion, not knowledge. [] and array() will have no functional > differences. >> > It is better to have input from people with a wide range of experience >> > levels, it results in a fairer vote that actually represents the >> > population, rather than putting PHP under the control of a select few. >> >> It is not under the control of anyone. The principle is: Contribute >> and your voice will be louder. It's easy to have a CVS account, and >> it's easy to fix some bugs and submit patches. That way, you prove >> that your voice can count and that you at least know what you are >> talking about (I'm not talking about you in particular, but any user >> that wants to contribute and have a voting voice that counts) > True >> One way could be that votes from internal / phpdoc counts twice as >> much as people that only leech this list. It's not controlling, but >> being sure that future decision about the language are made >> considering the opinions of people really knowing what's at stake. >> Regards, >> Olivier Best regards, Marcus