Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:5204 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 58224 invoked by uid 1010); 5 Nov 2003 11:22:29 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 58199 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2003 11:22:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mrelay-a.lmu.ac.uk) (160.9.128.16) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 5 Nov 2003 11:22:29 -0000 Received: from lis-exchange2.lmu.ac.uk ([160.9.35.2]) by mrelay-a.lmu.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 1AHLj0-0007eS-00; Wed, 05 Nov 2003 11:21:22 +0000 Received: by lis-exchange2.lmu.ac.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 5 Nov 2003 11:21:09 -0000 Message-ID: <841D90E489448A4F804E1D1B95768BF7D46267@lis-exchange3.lmu.ac.uk> To: 'Andi Gutmans' , Christian Schneider , internals@lists.php.net Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 11:21:00 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Proposal: Array syntax From: M.Ford@lmu.ac.uk ("Ford, Mike [LSS]") On 05 November 2003 08:50, Andi Gutmans contributed these pearls of wisdom: > At 12:33 AM 11/5/2003 +0100, Christian Schneider wrote: >> I propose to add an alternative (backward compatible) short >> array creation syntax: $a = [ 1, 2, 3 ]; and $a = [ 'a' => >> 42, 'b' => "foo" ]; > > Personally I don't like having two ways of doing things. It > makes it harder > for people to read scripts. > However, I think the proposed syntax is significantly more > elegant than > today's array() which makes me think twice about the idea and > possibly making an exception to the rule. I think it'll > improve the > look of PHP > scripts. Also I think people calling methods using > call_user_method([$obj, > "method"]); will find it sexier than the array() syntax. > I guess I think it'd be interesting to see what other's think. I would be greatly in favour of the [] construct. I've used a number of languages over the years which feature this kind of syntax (a current example being JavaScript), and always found the array() syntax clumsy by comparison. (And, to answer another thread, personally I don't think it's any more "magic" than the use of [] to access individual array elements -- and the two are so clearly related that once you know what one does it would be easy to guess the meaning of the other.) Cheers! Mike --------------------------------------------------------------------- Mike Ford, Electronic Information Services Adviser, Learning Support Services, Learning & Information Services, JG125, James Graham Building, Leeds Metropolitan University, Beckett Park, LEEDS, LS6 3QS, United Kingdom Email: m.ford@leedsmet.ac.uk Tel: +44 113 283 2600 extn 4730 Fax: +44 113 283 3211