Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:75850 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 93522 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2014 13:49:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 22 Jul 2014 13:49:46 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=rowan.collins@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=rowan.collins@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.174 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: rowan.collins@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.212.174 mail-wi0-f174.google.com Received: from [209.85.212.174] ([209.85.212.174:50539] helo=mail-wi0-f174.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 8D/51-21666-8FB6EC35 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 09:49:46 -0400 Received: by mail-wi0-f174.google.com with SMTP id d1so5996873wiv.13 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 06:49:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=r0LWXLa/lgOZmoX1BhgqtaUt93BRRhIGn7E6bgvr/8M=; b=Vq2ZN92ZYSB5dEIIxXvJGhGPniDr8riub/Tq2aAbnsA5qg+Q7ZwQJ8fmCHuQF2mFy6 A1QGhP3Akhc0Ry/W1jcK4MHUnSkiDE7WB+pu8SZVWI2mhm38s1dIDRPeycY9/UeIy7ag wADrWnOYSC50d745Lz4pTqV3Ln4wkuV39hkfAmDgZaBuleEvvVFvrh9kaa0VV7LBCwJF qn2WFWpumR2GNrEiJDKeuaC0d/Ws4OD49WRwTiPYgUMAG5ULGx7i0CluGO4pmO+ry+NY mLius+HK+LrGJs5zeoHRrmSt8qUiAUQ4sFklNEkR+6md1IgvlYEE6JcGPfAcIba1S8T/ Zzwg== X-Received: by 10.180.91.114 with SMTP id cd18mr2894017wib.4.1406036981432; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 06:49:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.177] ([62.189.198.114]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ed14sm54132161wic.10.2014.07.22.06.49.39 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 22 Jul 2014 06:49:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <53CE6B55.40104@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 14:47:01 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <8E0F15AF-8C44-4C19-BE64-A939D897BE77@apfelbox.net> In-Reply-To: <8E0F15AF-8C44-4C19-BE64-A939D897BE77@apfelbox.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [VOTE] Uniform Variable Syntax From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins) Jannik Zschiesche wrote (on 22/07/2014): > the point Derick was trying to make is that you can’t build a scanner that automatically checks whether you rewrote this particular piece of code already or not. > You can find the code pieces which match the constructs affected by the BC, but the scanner can’t decide, whether they are already fixed (= they are ok as they stand). I thought for each ambiguous case whose behaviour would change, there is a pair of unambiguous forms (one for each interpretation) which work the same under both parsers? If so, wouldn't it be possible to change every occurrence detected by the scanner to the appropriate unambiguous form (even if that is technically unnecessary for that particular case); then when you re-ran the scanner, it wouldn't find the same ones again? I'm probably missing a subtlety here, though... -- Rowan Collins [IMSoP]