Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:79630
Return-Path: <morrison.levi@gmail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 4086 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2014 06:51:26 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 14 Dec 2014 06:51:26 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=morrison.levi@gmail.com; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=morrison.levi@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.174 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: morrison.levi@gmail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.214.174 mail-ob0-f174.google.com  
Received: from [209.85.214.174] ([209.85.214.174:40474] helo=mail-ob0-f174.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id FB/F1-19873-C633D845 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Sun, 14 Dec 2014 01:51:24 -0500
Received: by mail-ob0-f174.google.com with SMTP id nt9so15097131obb.5
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Sat, 13 Dec 2014 22:51:21 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject
         :from:to:cc:content-type;
        bh=6zoOKX/S59bCANDBcKjt6Vpg1ejOnzUmyPQ5OVhdRWg=;
        b=WsdfaRr8gv/MhpAzyM/y+5XJaJIUSyGfm5uIyC3gV+65+T7aZbwV1RcK5doLH/d7Ln
         YMslHKG9uCQPADK2xdNtANeOZsv2UD6xNHRggTsGfKmTRvJAP93k3CjnOQo+R23FA6ah
         GsdOI7IdvGZcsGWReHbrPGpUfLrK4gRjbwL7ZT6Q4GqzkZKyH1rFKxmuFLK/KRVWH50T
         9xe/dH+8LaTJlWfUpD+mTcUxaMtubTCHaNyZLmnfZls9JY5lgZ3kjW5bTOXswsc1PVKH
         DULHgwHZhXhpjhf6jEbDHseKIW3mqRDY17wPOofP6LVVLRjG6C6F0FiEc8FPh5qtzrBt
         TNeQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.202.84.147 with SMTP id i141mr14471242oib.56.1418539881211;
 Sat, 13 Dec 2014 22:51:21 -0800 (PST)
Sender: morrison.levi@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.89.237 with HTTP; Sat, 13 Dec 2014 22:51:21 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1412132316440.4080@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl>
References: <B6.00.14066.691CC845@pb1.pair.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.11.1412132316440.4080@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl>
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2014 23:51:21 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: LqMNsn-xF2GvifgibJrWdgiXaxA
Message-ID: <CAFMT4NpeOuZyHk24iwSV866qXjnRg0z3Y35GX+e+PYEuXZHpmQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Derick Rethans <derick@php.net>
Cc: Leon Sorokin <leeoniya@gmail.com>, internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Fix incorrect ternary '?' associativity for 7.0?
From: levim@php.net (Levi Morrison)

While I think long-term this would be a beneficial change I think in
the short term it's quite a hurdle. There is definitely code out there
relying on this behavior and changing it will result in the worst BC
case: it will not fail in any way but will instead act differently.

I definitely want to clean up the language, but I don't see the value
in this one. In my opinion, chaining or nesting ternaries at all
should be discouraged; changing the associativity doesn't change the
fact that they are more difficult to follow and more error prone than
using different constructs.