Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:52623
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.218.42 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=eyCP5RabxN4pAZMrWNoACLSPsGvuSL0JJWrDMXImIU4CjHOvDmYrlv7Q+p/SXGIkyj
         aeZETr6KNrWFLYXat2shZuL6NPp7DOYig4BQ8nB2YqmJi0tu56jRBIcBA3QK0PesXk1o
         7LptAuIZZoIJGbAvKky33DPMps42HStCJBbIk=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4DE5CAEA.4030805@sugarcrm.com>
References: <4DE5368A.6050603@moonspot.net> <2BFFEAC1-395E-4101-9452-002E63DCFD91@seancoates.com>
 <4DE55AB7.9050206@lerdorf.com> <4DE55CDA.302@sugarcrm.com>
 <BANLkTincn+xOppttU-mmwGycbz5dPon_vA@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTinDk3YkJEBKeUSe_4og2NSY9rayxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4DE5666A.3080506@lerdorf.com> <BANLkTi=F4SdC0DCG1ec6EQSYpoonFX58UA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4DE5CAEA.4030805@sugarcrm.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 00:30:10 -0500
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=6Gv6nk0oE7pB8_1e=2xhMHy2m4A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=005045015be8a9d49e04a49fd1c0
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Short syntax for Arrays (redux)
From: dukeofgaming@gmail.com (dukeofgaming)

--005045015be8a9d49e04a49fd1c0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Also, take a peak at this: http://www.phpsadness.com/sad/45

And compare it with this:
http://perldoc.perl.org/perldsc.html#Declaration-of-a-HASH-OF-COMPLEX-RECORDS

Regards,

David Vega

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 12:15 AM, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>wrote:

> Hi!
>
>
>  I agree, it would be a break a lot of code. But I'd rather see some
>> fundamental changes at that level (call it PHP 6, make it not BC with
>> PHP 5.x or earlier), and remove the cruft and standardize on some of
>> the slop.
>>
>
> Fundamental changes means "throw out your production code and start
> developing a new one". Guess how many PHP shops with existing code would be
> happy to do it. It's nice to rant about how PHP function are inconsistent
> and stuff, but no project was seriously impeded by it ever. At most it is
> mildly irritating. Huge BC break, on the other hand, would mean all major
> apps/libraries/frameworks become instantly not available, and who knows when
> they catch up. At this point, you might as well have a new language.
>
>
>  Shorter array syntax seems like an unnecessary addon, will create more
>>
>
> Since many experienced people are supporting it, I'd think that while it
> seems unnecessary to you, it may seem otherwise for them.
>
>
>  I would help with the Unicode project if I could. I am not sure why it
>> was so tough, but I imagine people infinitely smarter than I am were
>>
>
> Read this (esp. first answer):
> http://stackoverflow.com/q/6162484/214196
>
> It's about Perl, but gives you an impression why it is so tough.
>
>
>  Making JSON style arrays seems stupid to me. When I look at a PHP
>> script I expect PHP syntax. Not stolen pieces from a bunch of other
>> languages (yes, some of it is that way already, but let's not keep the
>> trend going please?)
>>
>
> Why not? If the pieces are good, stealing them is good. It's how progress
> happens - you "steal" good pieces and add couple of your own, and hope the
> result is good enough that somebody else would want to steal stuff from it
> :)
>
> --
> Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
> SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
> (408)454-6900 ext. 227
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

--005045015be8a9d49e04a49fd1c0--