Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:34762
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain cumulo.fi from 81.228.8.111 cause and error)
Organization: Cumulo Studio
To: internals@lists.php.net
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 16:17:08 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID: <200801121617.09139.tomi@cumulo.fi>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] SUMMARY: Array syntax
From: tomi@cumulo.fi (Tomi Kaistila)

> =A0and 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...
I understand the need to have the final decision made by the core developer=
s.=20
Designing by committee never works but I also find that it is generally har=
d=20
to tell when someone does or does not have an understanding of the inner=20
workings of whatever is being suggested and in many cases it also is not=20
necessary.

Two good examples recently have been both scalar type hinting and array syn=
tax=20
discussions. Any PHP developer worth their salt can form a very worthy=20
opinion on the benefits and disadvantages of both issues. When it comes to=
=20
discussions about how exactly something is implemented into the core, that'=
s=20
naturally a discussion for those with an understanding of the internals.

Then there is also the fact that even someone of the "experienced" develope=
rs=20
on this list are not always capable of mature commentary. We witnessed this=
=20
with the couple dozen "if you want Java, use Java" comments on the scalar=20
type hinting thread.

I much rather judge each comment and suggestion by the technical merits of=
=20
exactly is being said and also draw a distinct difference between a technic=
al=20
argument and an opinion, BOTH which have their place in discussions about n=
ew=20
features and changes.

> 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.
E.g. this is clearly an opinion. As is mine that it honestly does not matte=
r=20
whether or not it looks like a function call. So do most the control=20
structures; if(), for(), while(), which(), foreach(), etc. There is nothing=
=20
wrong with that. In my opinion, it only makes it clear and easy to catch wh=
en=20
you are reading code (particularly that which someone else wrote).

Tomi Kaistila
PHP Developer