Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:59689
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.54 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAORXhGK47pRN8uUTENqSbddQoCP8VopomPhJW7N2pN6ZU8vNPQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAORXhGK47pRN8uUTENqSbddQoCP8VopomPhJW7N2pN6ZU8vNPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 16:59:51 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKOpQSz5tdkHK=MVsC8+8oL+Q-TGDAP=uBBC=i0p0pSJ4mn38Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tom Boutell <tom@punkave.com>
Cc: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0438934722bc0b04bd5bebf2
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] UPDATED RFC version 1.1: source files without opening
 <?php tag
From: kris.craig@gmail.com (Kris Craig)

--f46d0438934722bc0b04bd5bebf2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Tom,

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Tom Boutell <tom@punkave.com> wrote:

> Please see:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/source_files_without_opening_tag
>
> After following the discussion I have updated the RFC with the
> following major changes:
>
> * Forbade the use of ?> entirely in "pure PHP" files (without
> restricting it at all in other PHP files)
>
> * Replaced my original new require_path keyword with a second,
> optional parameter to the standard include/require family of keywords
>
> * Replaced an array of options with a bitwise OR of options
>
> * Changed the proposed filename extension from .phpc (which apparently
> is in use somewhere, maybe?) to .phpp ("php pure")
>
> --
> Tom Boutell
> P'unk Avenue
> 215 755 1330
> punkave.com
> window.punkave.com
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
Much better, though I'm still very troubled by allowing non-pure PHP code
to be mixed-in with pure PHP (by means of includes).  The problem I have
with this, as a developer, is that this means I can't really trust that
what I will get from a "pure PHP" script will actually be pure PHP, because
non-pure scripts lower in the stack might mix-in HTML code that would then
get passed up through the stack.  These really shouldn't be mixed anyway,
so I'm just not seeing any value in not keeping this separation consistent.

I'd be able to support this if that one remaining problem is fixed.  I
still would like to see the ability to add a <?phpp tag to a regular .php
file, but I can always propose that as a separate RFC later on so that's
not a deal-breaker for me.  But the lack of standards consistency is a
deal-breaker, for me at least.  :/

--Kris

--f46d0438934722bc0b04bd5bebf2--