Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:52451
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.213.170 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
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=C5Rb3vZaJ6QFE+enItoBsA5Spd5rVh180hXzeuuTgltitLCZsDyNe49IIi43CIsDWo
         BNnLFK0eftsFV5htyYihKiNxPR0bp15EnHG3fir5uPS2gX3Yuo7KD/Wy3KuF8TEI1F6E
         BSX77+Sm9EEyd0tQSXiL0GqjGSoMnmFUyy/CQ=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTin+C7vMC8NpcUZP3ZR3zrpUDR5nVQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <49E352FD.6070008@gmail.com> <DB.C3.22673.B3373E94@pb1.pair.com>
 <2dedb8a0904131124u57f2f32ei27083a289f7f18a4@mail.gmail.com>
 <49E39B3C.2020401@zend.com> <ECCFDCE9-C262-49AC-A0E7-B24A2199A117@roshambo.org>
 <49E47BF2.3090807@gmail.com> <9b3df6a50904140811o6d57a426gd320a822271e19f3@mail.gmail.com>
 <F1CC660D-2FAC-422B-8739-844E0D8F01D7@bitextender.com> <49E4CE2D.7010402@zend.com>
 <3B1B513E-2712-40C4-AC20-4A21EB039629@roshambo.org> <BANLkTin+C7vMC8NpcUZP3ZR3zrpUDR5nVQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 17:06:41 -0500
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=u8JNiQT4vMY_icGSWoiSjSrhZPA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com>
Cc: Philip Olson <philip@roshambo.org>, PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c92adfa61b1804a3941bd1
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
From: dukeofgaming@gmail.com (dukeofgaming)

--001636c92adfa61b1804a3941bd1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi,

I'm that somebody Tyrael is talking about. FTR, I'm all for deprecating
short tags, but I do feel the echo shortcut is a separate issue. Perhaps if
<?php= was implemented a greater deal of people on both sides of the
discussion would be happier.

Best regards,

David

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Philip Olson <philip@roshambo.org> wrote:
>
> > PLEASE, let the dead horse be!
> >>>>
> >>>
> >> Apparently, this horse is not as dead as some would like it to be :)
> >>
> >
> > The horse is not dead or if so then no proper burial service was given.
> > People are still waiting for the invitations and wanting to hear the
> eulogy.
> >
> > So, instead I'll make the following assumptions and engrave them into
> this
> > topics tombstone:
> >
> >  - short_open_tag is fully alive
> >  - short_open_tag is PHP_INI_SYSTEM|PHP_INI_PERDIR
> >  - all distributed php.ini files disable it (5.3+)
> >  - the default will be enabled, forever, unless #5 is used
> >  - --disable-short-tags will exist, forever
> >  - no new alternative syntax will be implemented, ever
> >
> > That's the situation people should understand and since this horse is
> > considered dead I will:
> >
> >  - update php.ini ini descriptions to reflect this
> >  - update documentation to reflect this
> >  - mark http://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortags as declined
> >  - point to the declined rfc when people suggest these alternatives
> >
> > All discussion is over unless a human knows the above synopsis is false,
> > because CVS has spoken. RIP.
> >
> >
> apparently somebody else brought up the shortag(specifically the <?= tag)
> topic again, and I've noticed that you moved the rfc from declined to "In
> discussion" recently (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortags?do=revisions), so
> I
> would like to know that are these rules still hold, or did something
> happened since this decision?
> I couldn't find the suggested clarification in the docs either (maybe
> looked
> at the wrong place)
>
> Tyrael
>

--001636c92adfa61b1804a3941bd1--