Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:52592
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.83.170 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc
         :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer;
        b=GAK/XOykJJLI5zAlDuwIFY9gVS/5MKu45lPCVPlJovq6iQ9Puk4QEID+HWSY9Bn3LO
         1ysCtV2R0ieQYx+u8TvPiXtLQo/DLKLRAIgtV7HKrJaoJA824lfbxDrYILeDWjaiDDlG
         F/CaJ1X745GuM/YT1iBeoa4SacWxABkA0jmt4=
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimCDmqvzcnhX9vTZF-jZpueJEWZKA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 16:47:59 -0500
Cc: Rasmus <rasmus@lerdorf.com>,
 Sean Coates <sean@seancoates.com>,
 PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <A223FC11-0509-471D-8ECD-DE5FD4929033@gmail.com>
References: <4DE5368A.6050603@moonspot.net> <2BFFEAC1-395E-4101-9452-002E63DCFD91@seancoates.com> <4DE55AB7.9050206@lerdorf.com> <BANLkTimCDmqvzcnhX9vTZF-jZpueJEWZKA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ilia Alshanetsky <ilia@prohost.org>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Short syntax for Arrays (redux)
From: shadda@gmail.com (Matt Wilson)

Would seem to me a more elegant solution would to just drop the idea of =
json interoperability and go with something that works for PHP.=20

('a'=3D>'b', 0=3D>1234) perhaps?

On May 31, 2011, at 4:45 PM, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:

> Rasmus,
>=20
> Don't you think having support for both ['a':1, 'b':2] and {'a':1,
> 'b':2} would create confusion?
>=20
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 11:16 PM, Rasmus <rasmus@lerdorf.com> wrote:
>> On 05/31/2011 11:52 AM, Sean Coates wrote:
>>> I'm one of the people who've brought it up on Twitter. Today's =
discussion seems to have earned some traction, which is a step in the =
right direction, I believe.
>>>=20
>>>> I would prefer (as Rasmus pointed out) not to start a long =
discussion about it. Primarily I would be curious if anyone on the lists =
(from the RFC wiki page) below would like to change your vote or if you =
are not listed below and would like to be counted, that would be great =
too.
>>>=20
>>> At risk of turning this into a longer-than-necessary discussion, I =
believe a new RFC is required at this point. Making [ and ] work as =
(T_ARRAY, '(') and (')'), respectively is no longer good enough, for the =
main reason you've pointed out: JSON is becoming ubiquitous; actual =
first-class JSON would be very valuable to me.
>>=20
>> The tricky part with going all json is the syntax, specifically the =
{}'s
>>=20
>> But I think it is doable, mostly because this is not valid today:
>>=20
>>  $a =3D true ? { 1 : 2 };
>>=20
>> And in json if you have {}'s you have to have a ':' inside.
>>=20
>> I have always preferred to "borrow" a familiar syntax from other
>> languages that the average PHP user is comfortable with instead of
>> making up a new one.
>>=20
>> Stas, I didn't understand your point about eval() and security. What =
did
>> you mean?
>>=20
>> -Rasmus
>>=20
>> --
>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>=20
>>=20
>=20
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>=20