Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:49955 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 4788 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2010 03:32:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 22 Oct 2010 03:32:02 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=pasthelod@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=pasthelod@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.42 as permitted sender) DomainKey-Status: bad X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: pasthelod@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.214.42 mail-bw0-f42.google.com Received: from [209.85.214.42] ([209.85.214.42:57768] helo=mail-bw0-f42.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id E7/C7-08818-1B501CC4 for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 23:32:02 -0400 Received: by bwz13 with SMTP id 13so962405bwz.29 for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 20:31:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=WumzNQpc9V7wF94OBc7O2rdIG5S2w8X38ddJAw0S/YE=; b=pAJJxE1cTwICyvY8KgX8gdQhJbv2CIZsKes8Atd61Obr61Gyg2A8aUWeyKh6jUbJzh aM64mJeML+a/XuU0oYKY3oWcmnDJL8CfmdTb3NK0Gpn39FUSE5678R2zxt9wyKPgRHbG nUttBubm+W6HTGp9P22s4M0OFz/KT4wqhC9BQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=ZfFBWQ1KIzYFsNZ1BJbprOuKKap15nOS7CaN8o+X9SOhPgcW5X9xpScG7UWjjL/POj WLo681tb7Qh7663qX6wNu4FsFulaIs4sc9xe7HpL7rVKQDsxK+EGXIKtxN5os/4E5tHL JlukY1dlQZMyf1NTKgM1rXq8MT/wNFq2oxZlc= Received: by 10.204.53.142 with SMTP id m14mr1354048bkg.147.1287718319116; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 20:31:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (catv-86-101-92-18.catv.broadband.hu [86.101.92.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p22sm973087bkp.21.2010.10.21.20.31.57 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 21 Oct 2010 20:31:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4CC105A9.6070106@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 05:31:53 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12pre) Gecko/20101010 Lightning/1.0b2 Lanikai/3.1.6pre MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <4CBFF13B.5060404@gmail.com> <4CC019B6.9080507@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Skipping of defaulted parameters. From: pasthelod@gmail.com (Pas) On 2010.10.21. 12:56, Richard Quadling wrote: > On 21 October 2010 11:45, Ionut G. Stan wrote: >> On 21/Oct/10 1:17 PM, Richard Quadling wrote: >>> >>> On 21 October 2010 08:52, Ionut G. Stan wrote: >>>> >>>> Option 5: Implement named parameters? >>>> >>> >>> Come on, play fair. I know all about the named parameters and I didn't >>> mention them. >> >> Where's the unfairness? I proposed them because the issue you raised is a >> perfectly valid reason to introduce named parameters. IMO. > > > Because for the last few days, named parameters have been discussed. > Again. And with the same result. Not yet (and maybe not ever) for PHP. > This wasn't a real discussion. Most of the contra-replies were of the "RTFM and no" kind. The last reference ( www.php.net/~derick/meeting-notes.html#named-parameters ) doesn't explain either. (It just says it'd violate PHP's KISS principle. But function calls with a ton of NULLs or array parsing isn't exactly simple either.) Although, there aren't any RFCs for the feature, so maybe you're right, there's nothing to discuss. Pas