Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:52620 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 66995 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2011 02:49:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 1 Jun 2011 02:49:45 -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 209.85.218.42 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: 209.85.218.42 mail-yi0-f42.google.com Received: from [209.85.218.42] ([209.85.218.42:61315] helo=mail-yi0-f42.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 6C/71-55965-8C8A5ED4 for ; Tue, 31 May 2011 22:49:44 -0400 Received: by yib12 with SMTP id 12so2399120yib.29 for ; Tue, 31 May 2011 19:49:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=152O41N7ie0A2WfU1x1MfoQsfNCLHeYdDUOhzoMyrX4=; b=Oag7+FhG7rbPP9t2t0z0UhoObplpqTctxcyTdL48cxk+85DzSUXWwIAG5wOebH6uHb HiQrafgITpZcVNz/yYSfFm6wtlLOoaIIYvfIWgbL1T4iNmjbEpicGZQNnyVAG6XVTkh1 m2MX7y5l87lBJNenuj0wkbU3l9Kmda8yqUcZ4= 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=miswqh5eMG5MnUCRWyfMeim4wgQHn01B8OBXqSSt7V/g6b20GSVxXS72xRB0U6+Slp WeR0fFqM8d2o9ZUNKUrgxqucTCx3o6Svi47eWHSlWGqTnu36FFsx2WHnc5hrvHYW/nuZ 330kpB/gt+8xAS6GY3AIxo5KmPh35RiwYAHyM= Received: by 10.101.166.1 with SMTP id t1mr4311025ano.43.1306896582091; Tue, 31 May 2011 19:49:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.96.15 with HTTP; Tue, 31 May 2011 19:49:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DE5A37C.7000807@lerdorf.com> References: <4DE5A37C.7000807@lerdorf.com> Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 21:49:22 -0500 Message-ID: To: Rasmus Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=005045015be888a59104a49d92e8 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: RFC: Short syntax for Arrays (redux) From: dukeofgaming@gmail.com (dukeofgaming) --005045015be888a59104a49d92e8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Rasmus wrote: > On 05/31/2011 05:42 PM, dukeofgaming wrote: > > > I'm afraid that if ":" is associated with the JSON interop argument and > the > > later is discarded then ":" will be discarded too, much like what > happened > > with the echo shortcut (" idea > > of JSON interop could be taken to another RFC and get less noise and > better > > ideas as a separate topic. > > > -Rasmus > Yep, I know, and thank you very much for that (I did see your commit a couple of hours after you posted it). I think there was a lot of confusion and fear (myself included) when "" is the only thing left to decide on this proposal. I was thinking that if ":" was to be introduced, perhaps "array('a':'A',...)" should also be added for consistency, and that is extra work. In my opinion adopting ":" would be nice, but it would also be noise for the developer community, perhaps good noise but noise nonetheless. The healthy thing to do here IMHO, would be putting introduction of ":" as a separate RFC, perhaps part of a JSON interoperability RFC, but as Adam just replied, PHP is not JSON and "=>" is a very fundamental thing to change, so I have mixed feelings about this. Also, can we agree on the topic of introducing "{ }" for objects to the proposal?. Best regards, David --005045015be888a59104a49d92e8--