Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:75904 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 19440 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2014 22:35:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 22 Jul 2014 22:35:10 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ajf@ajf.me; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ajf@ajf.me; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ajf.me designates 192.64.116.199 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ajf@ajf.me X-Host-Fingerprint: 192.64.116.199 imap11-2.ox.privateemail.com Received: from [192.64.116.199] ([192.64.116.199:51447] helo=imap11-2.ox.privateemail.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id A0/47-21666-D17EEC35 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 18:35:10 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2B9A8800EA; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 18:35:07 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at imap11.ox.privateemail.com Received: from mail.privateemail.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (imap11.ox.privateemail.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id KMT0raD33hxf; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 18:35:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.0.15] (unknown [90.210.122.167]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 421408800E4; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 18:35:00 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 23:34:56 +0100 Cc: PHP internals Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: References: To: Sara Golemon X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Language Specification From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds) On 22 Jul 2014, at 23:32, Sara Golemon wrote: > As you suppose, some of that bulk is down to the kinds of things that > the Unified Variable Syntax RFC is trying to resolve. On the plus > side, the guy who's been writing the spec is insanely detail oriented > (and has experience writing language specs), so all those inconsistent > semantics are represented. :) Does it handle the fact that =910xa=92 is variously zero and ten in = string to integer conversions? :) -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/