Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:37999
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 83.243.58.163 as permitted sender)
To: "\"Stan Vassilev | FM\"" <sv_forums@fmethod.com>
Cc: PHP Developers Mailing List <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <0412F6FE505049F7901EAB8C61774839@pc>
References: <0412F6FE505049F7901EAB8C61774839@pc>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 20:55:26 +0200
Message-ID: <1212087326.20983.22.camel@goldfinger.johannes.nop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Short syntax for array literals [...]
From: johannes@php.net (Johannes =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Schl=FCter?=)

Hi,

On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 05:12 +0300, "Stan Vassilev | FM" wrote:
> It looks as there may not be a specific reason not to allow the JS
>  syntax as an alternative syntax (while keeping the current one in parallel):
> 
> $a = [[1, 2], [3, 4], 5, 6];
> 
> $b = ['a' => 1, 'b' =>2];

ok, in a previous post I mentioned this was discussed short time ago (in
January to be precise) but well, then once again with more details:

When I learned more about PHP one of the things I learned was that PHP
was proud to be a bit more verbose than other languages while not as
verbose as others. By using the array()-Syntax newcomers had a thing to
look for when reading code which I always saw as a central design
principal of the language.

Now we can change such principals from time to time, the world changes,
so can PHP. But for changing such principals we need a clear consensus
imo. In the January discussion the result was around 50:50 which isn't a
clear consensus. Back then there was a small difference between
"committers" and "non-committers. In the group of the "committers" there
were a few more -1 than +1 votes, within the non-committers-group it was
the other way round (your favorite search engine should give you the
exact numbers, don't have it at hand). Now my second assumption is that
"committers" have thought a little bit more about language than "random"
commenters" of course there are exceptions but I think the general
picture should be like that. So in January this change wasn't accepted.

So, now, less than half a year later the discussion restarts and we
aren't much further, from what I see it still looks like a 50:50 to me -
without "counting".

Now to my own opinion:

I read way more code than I write, code from different people using
different coding styles etc. so I like a more verbose syntax.

johannes