Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:74669
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.173 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: kassner@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <2F19394F-C75C-40E8-94C3-507FAA9ADE28@ajf.me>
References: <6E3D6B3F-1BD6-42A2-B59C-12B9D6D597ED@ajf.me> <538B6D49.3030402@sugarcrm.com>
 <2F19394F-C75C-40E8-94C3-507FAA9ADE28@ajf.me>
Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 15:47:21 -0300
Message-ID: <CA+S5htPP3dyx+3e_xL_ZF576ouBmE5J6STL=RngO_ZmYxgGVtg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>
Cc: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0103defaa606b704facab629
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Bare Name Array
From: kassner@php.net (Rafael Kassner)

--089e0103defaa606b704facab629
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This causes a huge backward incompatibility:

define('KEY', 'foo');
> $data =3D array(KEY =3D> 'bar');


Should $data have 'foo' or 'KEY' as element? AFAIK, some frameworks use
this constants in array keys.


On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:

>
> On 1 Jun 2014, at 19:13, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com> wrote:
>
> > You can already do stringKey =3D> 3 :)
>
> Yes, but then you=E2=80=99ll get:
>         Notice: Use of undefined constant stringKey - assumed 'stringKey'
> in Command line code on line 1
>
> > And saving characters is not really
> > a big priority.
>
> Well, we already replaced array() with []. I think it is reasonable to
> consider saving characters in other places. It=E2=80=99s not a *big* prio=
rity, no,
> and we shouldn=E2=80=99t do it excessively, but if common cases are cumbe=
rsome, we
> should try to deal with them.
>
> Array literals with string keys and dereferencing arrays with string keys
> are extremely common in PHP. So I think this reduction would benefit most
> users, especially those who deal with JSON and the like (which I do a lot
> in my on code), as this makes declaring arrays to be serialised more
> convenient. Also, foobar: just looks nicer than =E2=80=9Cfoobar=E2=80=9D =
=3D>, especially
> when you have syntax highlighting.
>
> > Changing language syntax and making millions of people
> > to learn new syntax just to save a couple of chars does not look like a
> > big win to me.
>
> We did it for array(), I think we should do it again. Also, yes, millions
> might have to learn the new syntax, but I think it is simple and intuitiv=
e.
> It is not difficult to learn, and hey, perhaps millions can benefit,
> especially since both target very common cases (I expect they=E2=80=99re =
the most
> common, except for numerical indexes) when dealing with arrays.
> --
> Andrea Faulds
> http://ajf.me/
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

--089e0103defaa606b704facab629--