Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:74799
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.178 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <45A8B0C0-52D1-4E4C-A314-4396B6FD635E@ajf.me>
References: <CAF+90c-jyBCnHdYjssGV+Avsw2B=Zt8TpNUzuDsNDWabV43fQg@mail.gmail.com>
	<45A8B0C0-52D1-4E4C-A314-4396B6FD635E@ajf.me>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 16:12:45 +0200
Message-ID: <CAF+90c_=qeJZZR0abseGgfM0q2D+X+E2-QZkFeYqf7PVJUo6jA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0149464629a76f04fb67ced0
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [PHP 6] Uniform Variable Syntax
From: nikita.ppv@gmail.com (Nikita Popov)

--089e0149464629a76f04fb67ced0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:

>
> On 9 Jun 2014, at 14:33, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I have created a proposal for a more consistent and complete variable
> > syntax for PHP 6:
> >
> >    https://wiki.php.net/rfc/uniform_variable_syntax
> >
> > The RFC is targeted at PHP 6 because it breaks compatibility for some
> > rarely used variable-variable constructs.
>
> I love this proposal! The behaviour of $$ is non-intuitive at present and
> has bitten me more than once, and the weird behaviour of :: has also caus=
ed
> me problems. In particular, my miniature web framework didn=E2=80=99t wor=
k properly
> due to this line:
>
>     self::$views[$path]();
>
> It=E2=80=99s easy to fix ($x =3D self::$views[$path]; $x();) but the fact=
 that
> didn=E2=80=99t work has bothered me immensely for two years. It seems to =
me like
> the RFC would fix this. Would it? If so, you are my hero.
>

Yes, it would ;)


> On a somewhat more serious note, do we have any idea of how much code thi=
s
> would break? Is the current behaviour widely relied-upon?
>

Quoting
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/uniform_variable_syntax#backward_incompatible_chan=
ges
:

> An analysis of the Zend Framework and Symfony projects
> (including standard dependencies) showed that only a single
> occurrence of $loader[0]::$loader[1]($className) in the Doctrine
> class loader will be affected by this change.

So I think that this will not break much code. It is also easy to detect
and fix. (I am using this script to find potential problems:
https://gist.github.com/nikic/ffd019ef78b72934c7cc)

Nikita

--089e0149464629a76f04fb67ced0--