Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:83515
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.53 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: marcio3w@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <54EA5644.1090404@gmail.com>
References: <CAOsHV+vOuvGxAz6EEjhwCL3fGN2YiNB1OfaJTfnFaKNB6-0SKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <54EA5644.1090404@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 21:18:42 -0300
Message-ID: <CAOsHV+urfoS6x=WsgRd6AdvV+1bFcVfHHZ92=o5Hio_ERBhHZw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0158ba6c721526050fb6594e
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][DISCUSSION] Context Sensitive lexer
From: marcio.web2@gmail.com (Marcio Almada)

--089e0158ba6c721526050fb6594e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi, Stas

2015-02-22 19:20 GMT-03:00 Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>:

> Hi!
>
> I like the idea. But we need to examine the cases carefully so we don't
> block some future routes - especially this is with regards to such
> things as type names which we wanted to reserve.
>
> I.e. method names resolution is probably clear, since they appear after
> -> or ::, but for class names the context may be much more varied.
> --
> Stas Malyshev
> smalyshev@gmail.com
>

I agree. You and Nikita are right. Doing more than that with a pure lexical
approach, without migrating to another lexer generator (which was already
attempted before) or using some form of lexer feedback (which at current
state breaks ext tokenizer) would be inadequate and create future issues.
I'll probably work on a more ambitious and adequate solution for PHP
7.1~7.2.

For now, as said before, I'll revert the RFC, and proposed patch, to
version 0.2 aiming only class|object members declaration and access. This
is perfectly achievable, has no drawbacks and brings many benefits. The RFC
will probably be ready for discussion again in ~2 days.

Thanks,
M=C3=A1rcio

--089e0158ba6c721526050fb6594e--