Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:80484 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 37235 invoked from network); 14 Jan 2015 19:50:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 14 Jan 2015 19:50:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=dev@mabe.berlin; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=dev@mabe.berlin; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain mabe.berlin from 80.237.132.167 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: dev@mabe.berlin X-Host-Fingerprint: 80.237.132.167 wp160.webpack.hosteurope.de Received: from [80.237.132.167] ([80.237.132.167:40257] helo=wp160.webpack.hosteurope.de) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id F1/69-19120-298C6B45 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 14:50:43 -0500 Received: from dslb-188-102-028-105.188.102.pools.vodafone-ip.de ([188.102.28.105] helo=[192.168.178.30]); authenticated by wp160.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) id 1YBTxf-0005Hd-Eb; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 20:50:39 +0100 Message-ID: <54B6C88E.2050604@mabe.berlin> Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 20:50:38 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Adam Harvey CC: PHP internals References: <52243BA6.5040905@sugarcrm.com> <54B6C047.3070301@mabe.berlin> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;dev@mabe.berlin;1421265043;b422db0a; Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Skipping parameters take 2 From: dev@mabe.berlin (Marc Bennewitz) Am 14.01.2015 um 20:21 schrieb Adam Harvey: > On 14 January 2015 at 11:15, Marc Bennewitz wrote: >> But I think adding "default" as new keyword is a big BC break! > Default already is a keyword: http://php.net/switch. There's no BC break. OMG you are right - my fault > >> I personally also don't like it and asked myself why can't the parameter >> simply skipped? > That was in the original proposal, but counting commas is pretty lousy > if you're skipping more than one or two parameters. Having a keyword > makes it more readable. > > Adam >