Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:70405 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 51510 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2013 15:32:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 26 Nov 2013 15:32:38 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=hello@apfelbox.net; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=hello@apfelbox.net; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain apfelbox.net from 37.139.17.48 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: hello@apfelbox.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 37.139.17.48 mail.apfelbox.net Received: from [37.139.17.48] ([37.139.17.48:37299] helo=mail.apfelbox.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 7A/62-39355-41FB4925 for ; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 10:32:37 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.apfelbox.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BA64121E75; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 15:32:33 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.apfelbox.net Received: from mail.apfelbox.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.apfelbox.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id k4ECy7EFY8QR; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 15:32:27 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 16:32:27 +0100 To: Mats Lindh Cc: Chris London , "=?utf-8?Q?internals=40lists.php.net?=" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="5294bf0b_2eb141f2_a2" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [Proposal] Modification to ?: functionality From: hello@apfelbox.net (Jannik Zschiesche) --5294bf0b_2eb141f2_a2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Hi, Am Dienstag, 26. November 2013 um 16:15 schrieb Mats Lindh: > On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Chris London wrote: > > following would be functionally equivalent: > > =20 > > =24foo =3D isset(=24foo) && =24foo =3F =24foo : 'default'; > > =20 > > =24foo =3D =24foo =3F: 'default'; > =20 > The would break the assumption that a reference to an uninitialized val= ue > would generate a notice, unless explicitly handled in the logic. > =20 > While I also would like to have something similar to =3F: to handle def= ault > values for array keys, etc., this would change a fundamental assumption= > that as been in place for many years now. I'm not sure if that's a BC b= reak > that would be acceptable this late. An alternative operator may be more= > suitable. Since the discussion about it is quite vivid at the moment: wouldn=E2=80=99t this be a nice candidate for one of the changes in the n= ext major version=3F -- =20 Cheers Jannik --5294bf0b_2eb141f2_a2--