Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:85524 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 28215 invoked from network); 29 Mar 2015 09:19:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 29 Mar 2015 09:19:18 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=mailing@pascal-martin.fr; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=mailing@pascal-martin.fr; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain pascal-martin.fr designates 91.121.85.26 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: mailing@pascal-martin.fr X-Host-Fingerprint: 91.121.85.26 ns362529.ip-91-121-85.eu Received: from [91.121.85.26] ([91.121.85.26:52023] helo=pascal-martin.fr) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id C4/A0-20536-393C7155 for ; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 04:19:16 -0500 Received: from [192.168.0.3] (home.squalenet.net [82.225.233.238]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pascal-martin.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 15BEAE09D1 for ; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 11:19:12 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <5517C38F.70702@pascal-martin.fr> Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 11:19:11 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][VOTE] In Operator From: mailing@pascal-martin.fr ("Pascal Martin, AFUP") Le 15/03/2015 20:31, Niklas Keller a écrit : > I just opened the vote for the in operator Hi, Discussing this RFC with other people at AFUP, it seems the majority of us ended up on the +1 side. The idea of a unified syntax to find whether or not something is *in* something else seems to be interesting for many. On the other hand, some noted this new operator doesn't feel like "the PHP way" and cannot be used as a callback (as it's not a function). A few also suggested if this is accepted, maybe it could be extended for objects in the future; with new a specific method? In any case, thanks for your work on this! -- Pascal MARTIN, AFUP - French UG http://php-internals.afup.org/