Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:75154
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ajf.me designates 192.64.116.200 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.2\))
In-Reply-To: <CA+9eiLtCyuMVN-CN_hnLCCij4nymUiKEa26K_S_qM1PN-g-4HA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 22:05:17 +0100
Cc: Bob Weinand <bobwei9@hotmail.com>,
 Xinchen Hui <xinchen.h@zend.com>,
 David Soria Parra <dsp@php.net>,
 Julien Pauli <jpauli@php.net>,
 PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <FF875EF5-AC89-49DE-808A-DA734FBFD9BA@ajf.me>
References: <CA+9eiLtCyuMVN-CN_hnLCCij4nymUiKEa26K_S_qM1PN-g-4HA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Wired constant expression syntax and bug
From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds)


On 30 Jun 2014, at 20:06, Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com> wrote:

> Hi Bob,
>=20
> I'm wondered why you introduced this wired syntax in PHP-5.6.

Do you mean weird?


>=20
> class FooBar {
>              const bar =3D ["bar" =3D> 3]["bar"];
> }
>=20
> It wasn't a part of RFC, it wasn't covered by tests, and it actually
> doesn't make a lot of sense. May be it's better to remove it?

I disagree, it makes perfect sense:

class FooBar {
   const FOO =3D 3;
   const BAR =3D [
       3 =3D> =91qux=92,
       4 =3D> =91bang=92,
       7 =3D> =91theta=92,
       9 =3D> =91epsilon=92
   ][FOO];
}

?: and ? only work when there are just two possibilities.

It is surprising that it wasn=92t in the RFC though, I suspect that was =
just an oversight on Bob=92s part.
--
Andrea Faulds
http://ajf.me/