Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:36346
Return-Path: <helly@php.net>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 59953 invoked from network); 22 Mar 2008 23:59:20 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 22 Mar 2008 23:59:20 -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] ([85.214.94.56:59357] helo=h1149922.serverkompetenz.net)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id DB/5D-16027-55D95E74 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Sat, 22 Mar 2008 18:59:20 -0500
Received: from MBOERGER-ZRH.corp.google.com (72-216.1-85.cust.bluewin.ch [85.1.216.72])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by h1149922.serverkompetenz.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53B5911F110;
	Sun, 23 Mar 2008 00:59:14 +0100 (CET)
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 00:58:43 +0100
Reply-To: Marcus Boerger <helly@php.net>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <156421421.20080323005843@marcus-boerger.de>
To: Gregory Beaver <greg@chiaraquartet.net>
CC: Stefan Walk <stefan.walk@gmail.com>, 
	'PHP Internals' <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <47E59290.6090403@chiaraquartet.net>
References: <47E3F714.60302@zend.com>  <883216194.20080321193140@marcus-boerger.de> <47E40848.1060103@zend.com>  <47E40C3F.8040601@sci.fi> <47E40E6E.5030103@zend.com>  <1679837983.20080321204458@marcus-boerger.de> <47E415A2.30006@zend.com>  <35948940.20080321211345@marcus-boerger.de> <1206224154.31721.26.camel@goldfinger> <47E58D81.703@gmail.com> <47E59290.6090403@chiaraquartet.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] short_open_tag
From: helly@php.net (Marcus Boerger)

Hello Gregory,

Sunday, March 23, 2008, 12:13:20 AM, you wrote:

> Stefan Walk wrote:
>> Johannes Schlüter schrieb:
>>> Now we have the big issue: Do we want to have short open tags forever?
>>> Well, without tooo much thinking my idea would be to drop "<?" but keep
>>> "<?=", "<?=" shouldn't conflict with <?xml tags in the same file, but
>>> make it simple to do templating using PHP, on the other hand when not
>>> echo'ing stuff you already have to write more soo the four additional
>>> characters ("php ") don't matter that much - especially every decent
>>> editor/ide should be able to give you a completion on that, if you want.
>> 
>> <ul>
>> <? foreach ($items as $item): ?>
>> <li><?=$item?></li>
>> <? endforeach ?>
>> </ul>
>> 
>> you can have short stuff without outputting stuff too.

> I see many good reasons to disable short open tags.  However, there is a
> compromise that is better from all vantage points:

> <ul>
> <?p foreach ($items as $item): ?>
> <li><?=$item ?></li>
> <?p endforeach ?>
> </ul>

> <?p is a valid PI and would prevent <?xml from being parsed as PHP.
> Also legal is <?: as PI's can start with or contain : or _.  Honestly
> though, this is not so important to me, my primary concern is the
> conflict with <?xml.  I mention it out of deference for those who
> actually do care about writing scripts that are xml-compliant for some
> strange reason :).  Also possible and relatively simple to implement
> would be to allow an = at the start of an expression to alias to T_ECHO,
> so that <?p =$item ?> would work like <?=$item?>.  This is, however,
> very perl-ish, so I mention it only as a possible way to preserve that
> aspect of short tags for template usage.  God forbid we start seeing
> regular scripts using "=" to mean "echo" :).

> As a note, I use exclusively <?php in my templates and also use <?xml to
> generate xhtml, so I am very much against per-script enabling of short
> tag <? for the annoyance it would introduce of forcing an ini_set() at
> the top of each template and the bottom as well to be a good citizen and
> restore the old value.

To me this sounds more like we were heading towards '<?p' as short of
'<?php' and '<?:' as working erm conflict free form of '<?='.

Best regards,
 Marcus