Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:48691
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.170 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
         :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=i7AszvVZzOiFeFuQBqjDHMGzrj8nopK+Ayo/jbOIy8z7yMQ5sBuXnIZk+kCRLd0d0q
         zbuF2BBNlEMjMOHXF72zKfGdh4wdUCJ5ja/d3chfrEkx8kAlVLEDFREjqSbHq5qupqrt
         jezIj6NFM5i5lrlVlyBFIJL76C5yQu9ea/hdk=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <93ED589E60BA254F97435FE6C97F2C670A96E32C@leedsmet-exch1.leedsmet.ac.uk>
References: <AANLkTik41Xs6rP2TAwWn0PfKpy3H31OZ47KtfrfpI09S@mail.gmail.com> 
	<2C70277E-0442-49B8-AD0B-E9F12ED7B42C@oettinger.dk> <1275993681.2243.10.camel@guybrush> 
	<C091E733-D1CE-4494-A176-9B6E878C5ACA@oettinger.dk> <93ED589E60BA254F97435FE6C97F2C670A96E32C@leedsmet-exch1.leedsmet.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 17:20:52 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTilFsDTVmm3kQ7nDTGkx19Hkdmh9wJykbUozO6Wx@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Ford, Mike" <M.Ford@leedsmet.ac.uk>
Cc: internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Array Dereferencing
From: peter.e.lind@gmail.com (Peter Lind)

On 8 June 2010 16:57, Ford, Mike <M.Ford@leedsmet.ac.uk> wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jacob Oettinger [mailto:jacob@oettinger.dk]
>> Sent: 08 June 2010 14:09
>>
>> On 08/06/2010, at 12.41, Johannes Schl=C3=BCter wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 12:23 +0200, Jacob Oettinger wrote:
>> >> Would it be equally simple to allow the syntax below?
>> >>
>> >> $result =3D new ResultMaker()->getIt();
>> >
>> > does this mean
>> >
>> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0$result =3D new (ResultMaker()->getIt());
>> >
>> > or
>> >
>> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0$result =3D (new ResultMaker())->getIt();
>> >
>> > I assume the later, but that is non-obvious as we allow
>> >
>> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0$result =3D new $class();
>>
>> Yes the later. I do not see how the above makes it non-obvious.
>
> I think the only problem with deciding which it means is that -> and () a=
re not defined as operators in the PHP documentation, and as such do not ha=
ve a clearly-defined precedence and associativity. In Javascript, "." (prop=
erty access) and "()" (function call) both appear in the operator precedenc=
e table, so there are definite rules for ascertaining the meaning of such a=
 construct.
>
> Up until recently this probably hasn't really been a problem, as it's not=
 been possible to write constructs that needed these rules to decipher them=
. However, with the previous addition of object access chaining, and now ar=
ray dereferencing, the time has almost certainly come to add -> and () to t=
he operator documentation, with appropriate precedence and associativity.
>
> (Incidentally, other operators which are not documented in the "Operators=
" section, and probably should be, include :: (which *is* described in the =
"Classes and Objects" section as the "Scope Resolution Operator", and \ (na=
mespace separator).)
>

The operator that really determines this is 'new' - which is already
documented. So there isn't any ambiguity. Not to say that documenting
the other operators would be bad, just saying there's no ambiguity
here :)
 Also, allowing "new (blah());" would be a fairly big BC break I'd say.

Regards
Peter

--=20
<hype>
WWW: http://plphp.dk / http://plind.dk
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/plind
BeWelcome/Couchsurfing: Fake51
Twitter: http://twitter.com/kafe15
</hype>