Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:52826
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.161.170 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=IZuJLRJfcEKJAVQ+BnPXcOF1six305dSey+u4EZ5sQ3rDIbSfhmRmzzSBWCR+/OL/Z
         1eF87TxrEaPmiXfX+75SitX7ozqBw6gtIOIp8lB0BeNxnwfX26jVamoEJpTIAzPkafdX
         P+QbcMJrsyFoJEC7dIxr+l8rv/ch6C2HFAimA=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTiky06ecGgk6YUKhXK=V=CTARQYu1Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4DE5368A.6050603@moonspot.net> <BANLkTi=z+TLaLzKWArm7fmQ9h6syxGM8QA@mail.gmail.com>
 <0047B798-AFBC-41CF-A4EC-74A026B657FE@seancoates.com> <BANLkTimfjtDS3K=KE7WTRA6K+uxFR4Km4A@mail.gmail.com>
 <8377D924-763A-4C44-A018-052A74686BA9@seancoates.com> <BANLkTiky06ecGgk6YUKhXK=V=CTARQYu1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 19:13:33 -0500
Message-ID: <BANLkTikwTA+3WPLvYV21g7x98U_hOYnDiw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>
Cc: Sean Coates <sean@seancoates.com>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e68de980fb0e8204a4c3a077
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Short syntax for Arrays (redux)
From: dukeofgaming@gmail.com (dukeofgaming)

--0016e68de980fb0e8204a4c3a077
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

State the case for JSON in a separate RFC and progress will be made, but I
think there is a fundamental mistake here: serialization formats are the
*means* for interoperability, not the ends.

The only way I see JSONy syntax would help is if PHP code =97with JSONy
syntax=97 would be parsed by a JSON parser, and I don't think that is likel=
y
to happen... if you want PHP to have a data structure behave like JSON that
is another story.

Add use cases, syntax descriptions, and perhaps a patch for this JSON RFC
and the main argument will be better understood; an RFC will help, visceral
statements and personal attacks, on the other hand, won't, so I bet your
time =97and everybody else's=97 will be better spent in writing an RFC to d=
efend
it.

Regards,

David

On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Sean Coates <sean@seancoates.com> wrote:
> >>> If people vote on this now, will further discussion about how this
> SHOULD
> >>> work be shut down with "we already voted on this"?
> >> which other discussions do you wish? Json is clearly not an option and
> >> not enough people (but a couple) likes or wants it.
> >>
> >> The RFC is about short array syntax and as far as I can see there is
> >> already a clear consensus for one of the proposed new syntax.
> >
> > I don't see why JSON (or JSON-like, or JavaScript Object Literal, or
> whatever the least politically-fired term of the moment) syntax is "clear=
ly"
> not an option. I'm considering writing a new RFC that calls for first-cla=
ss
> JSONishy syntax, but I have better things to do if it's already dead in t=
he
> water.
> >
> > As much as I'd like to avoid drawing out this discussion, I think a
> premature vote that will be used as a political wedge to shut down all
> future syntaxes that don't use T_ARRAY is not in the best interest of PHP=
.
>
> You can still vote -1 on this RFC and try to block it. That's the
> purpose of the votes. But arguing endlessly why json-like syntax is
> better without an alternative RFC and patch won't bring you anywhere.
>
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Pierre
>
> @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

--0016e68de980fb0e8204a4c3a077--