Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:50825 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 73416 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2010 16:07:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 2 Dec 2010 16:07:59 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=larry@garfieldtech.com; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=larry@garfieldtech.com; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain garfieldtech.com from 76.96.27.227 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: larry@garfieldtech.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 76.96.27.227 qmta12.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net Received: from [76.96.27.227] ([76.96.27.227:43421] helo=qmta12.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 4C/00-07252-D54C7FC4 for ; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 11:07:58 -0500 Received: from omta23.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.90]) by qmta12.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id eD1Y1f0021wfjNsACG7v0A; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 16:07:55 +0000 Received: from earth.ufp ([98.220.236.211]) by omta23.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id eG7u1f0014aLjBW8jG7ut1; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 16:07:54 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by earth.ufp (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6A08D7A51 for ; Thu, 2 Dec 2010 10:07:53 -0600 (CST) Received: from earth.ufp ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (earth.ufp [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 43KPqHXLQIHP for ; Thu, 2 Dec 2010 10:07:53 -0600 (CST) Received: from garfield.ad.palantir.net (unknown [209.41.114.202]) by earth.ufp (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 84541D7A50 for ; Thu, 2 Dec 2010 10:07:53 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <4CF7C458.7040306@garfieldtech.com> Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2010 10:07:52 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <1290879624.7033.826.camel@guybrush> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Making T_FUNCTION optional in method declarations From: larry@garfieldtech.com ("larry@garfieldtech.com") On 12/2/10 7:51 AM, Patrick ALLAERT wrote: >>> +1 for removing T_VAR and making T_FUNCTION optional in a major release. >>> -1 otherwise. I am still firmly -1 on removing T_FUNCTION for methods. >>> -- >>> Patrick Allaert >>> --- >>> http://code.google.com/p/peclapm/ - Alternative PHP Monitor >>> >>> -- >>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >>> >> >> An entire major version relied on the usage of T_VAR within classes. >> Many people still use it today. >> I therefore am strongly against removing T_VAR, considering it would >> break huge amounts of userland code. > > If people migrate to a major version of PHP> 5 they should at least > stop relying on PHP 4 features still valid thanks to BC consideration. > >> In either case, it should be >> deprecated with an E_DEPRECATED warning during at least another major >> before it gets removed. > > This makes much sense! Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't T_VAR on class members already an E_STRICT warning? I thought it was... --Larry Garfield