Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:50803 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 98611 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2010 09:54:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 2 Dec 2010 09:54:54 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=dukeofgaming@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=dukeofgaming@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.170 as permitted sender) DomainKey-Status: bad X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: dukeofgaming@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 74.125.82.170 mail-wy0-f170.google.com Received: from [74.125.82.170] ([74.125.82.170:42540] helo=mail-wy0-f170.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id A8/13-15182-3EC67FC4 for ; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 04:54:53 -0500 Received: by wyb34 with SMTP id 34so9493wyb.29 for ; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 01:54:34 -0800 (PST) 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; bh=UlRFzuvcNROIRcOcLgga5s8Y25V48ozWC4+rO9x4g+g=; b=u1HF2rpbYl6kuFKggx+E4Am8QAIAZlC4Q7IboEUKgqjpqowhUmyJ9SRp/mvPTGZUYw Wl872O6Te3C1o0z+Y8Tiswx+HpJNFfhGSDN8Fwf8BnPhvwcL07bvNIP8J5BHUs/qe7Yr zBpG4QXdLNi+lcur2BhHL73fbKzVVIHaw/4n4= 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; b=hIWBTa254MM5KRf5GsFWuZBSB8ISzeKuxl85NEtbfPUFPGZM8xTySWWo+epV1wkqgW VQGIltlKrab+KKcMTxxutZ+bJFpQfK+DE7Mj86rnrWgRjNQi+j4AGrCqkNhW5lVN2XWn W/kEguxQ9LTYeMcDbHQxj2njQA2lsg/ppxg/s= Received: by 10.216.166.68 with SMTP id f46mr3204464wel.26.1291283071076; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 01:44:31 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.238.134 with HTTP; Thu, 2 Dec 2010 01:44:10 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <1290879624.7033.826.camel@guybrush> Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 03:44:10 -0600 Message-ID: To: Patrick ALLAERT Cc: Kalle Sommer Nielsen , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Johannes_Schl=FCter?= , PHP internals list Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001485f9481ec18a7a04966a44fc Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Making T_FUNCTION optional in method declarations From: dukeofgaming@gmail.com (dukeofgaming) --001485f9481ec18a7a04966a44fc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I toast to that. Get rid of T_VAR already. Regards, David On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 3:34 AM, Patrick ALLAERT wrote: > 2010/11/30 Kalle Sommer Nielsen : > > Hi > > > > 2010/11/30 Patrick ALLAERT : > >> With this patch, something looks inconsistent to me: > >> Both properties and methods have a visibility > >> (public|protected|private) and a keyword: "var" (T_VAR) and "function" > >> (T_FUNCTION) respectively. > >> However "private var $foo;" generates a fatal error but "private > >> function foo(){}" not? > > > > The "var" keyword is an alias of the "public" keyword for BC with > > PHP4. So it would be illogically to declare a property both private > > and public at the same time ;-) > > Shouldn't we get rid of that kind of pre-PHP5 stuff _before_ > introducing the possible omission of T_FUNCTION? > > Patrick > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > --001485f9481ec18a7a04966a44fc--