Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:48693 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 67763 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2010 15:38:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 8 Jun 2010 15:38:58 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=peter.e.lind@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=peter.e.lind@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.160.42 as permitted sender) DomainKey-Status: bad X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: peter.e.lind@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.160.42 mail-pw0-f42.google.com Received: from [209.85.160.42] ([209.85.160.42:63325] helo=mail-pw0-f42.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id B2/51-13782-1146E0C4 for ; Tue, 08 Jun 2010 11:38:58 -0400 Received: by pwi4 with SMTP id 4so70262pwi.29 for ; Tue, 08 Jun 2010 08:38:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=APZn3Hu7qmbcBKQAPOsD9TDLowb4rVPZjg6hnfEW84w=; b=h7XOAUkv/6E2ndBU3Ipg3IC7QX3eGn+fl+f+G1x21qU29BjtXxQWAe7J5y4ejblTpj GNwLoZPU2wSGX6GogPWNN+zTLmc5iOKrmfWQJC7gOWBRnOZ9IJcUSP2MIRlv10Xnxhtx 7NtzRTbEkwbJvcqFORqfqx/Bc7OoV2Ck/ReIw= 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=bt7YVJWcU2EbH+FEfzHI9Gw+rOzDXoRs/1jUSOg65bnbxRyWZDmpnVxf8btHRCp0Zr fKoIIgLXYhzDHlLwC70Q1q82EzXYLUWSb//9k1oOdipKN27J2JDTvgW1z4a2p4GwzTee 9IYNmbAf5x+2eJ8dNuRD/fvHF2IOFw19iuZQ0= Received: by 10.224.5.138 with SMTP id 10mr8927772qav.44.1276011531275; Tue, 08 Jun 2010 08:38:51 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.37.70 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Jun 2010 08:38:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4C0E61A6.7090604@moonspot.net> References: <2C70277E-0442-49B8-AD0B-E9F12ED7B42C@oettinger.dk> <1275993681.2243.10.camel@guybrush> <93ED589E60BA254F97435FE6C97F2C670A96E32C@leedsmet-exch1.leedsmet.ac.uk> <4C0E61A6.7090604@moonspot.net> Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 17:38:31 +0200 Message-ID: To: Brian Moon Cc: "Ford, Mike" , internals 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 17:28, Brian Moon wrote: >> 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 :) >> =C2=A0Also, allowing "new (blah());" would be a fairly big BC break I'd = say. > > How? Maybe you don't understand what BC break means. Currently, new ( > produces a parse error. So, no old code would ever be broken. That is wha= t a > BC break is. A change to the system that breaks old code. New code very > often does not run on older versions of the parser. I do understand what BC break means - I was probably just too quick on that one. I figured that allowing 'new (blahblah())' would introduce ambiguity for handling parentheses in general with regards to 'new', but I'm probably wrong. Regards Peter --=20 WWW: http://plphp.dk / http://plind.dk LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/plind BeWelcome/Couchsurfing: Fake51 Twitter: http://twitter.com/kafe15