Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:88835
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.52 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAJGzsHqh1V4QADFO-sWSBTa_atbwVNCzcGD=iJEzAxDeR4_=ww@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALYT1YpZVz-ixf-v9GdCM3EcYOdt9zAOH03_2rA3BK4FRDuD6w@mail.gmail.com>
	<561F4EEB.8070605@telia.com>
	<CAESVnVqSgpSO1pAWVgon6kcTSA_8vxB+P0f-TDwCGgN=E0xq9Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAObuZdubug0ZOp1FS4ew31LM-prc6vEFwXkhoWc5O8RVjtfzyQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJGzsHqh1V4QADFO-sWSBTa_atbwVNCzcGD=iJEzAxDeR4_=ww@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:48:02 -0600
Message-ID: <CAObuZdvVTzuDnD_z_fYAUFtD9v4-GdqH6PiRRWxghj+wvhu=5A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pedro Cordeiro <pedronaroga@gmail.com>
Cc: Sara Golemon <pollita@php.net>, =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_Larsson?= <bjorn.x.larsson@telia.com>, 
	Sammy Kaye Powers <me@sammyk.me>, PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0444806f0056e2052229f520
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][DISCUSSION] Revisit trailing commas in function arguments
From: derokorian@gmail.com (Ryan Pallas)

--f46d0444806f0056e2052229f520
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Pedro Cordeiro <pedronaroga@gmail.com>
wrote:

> > Wouldn't this give the same benefit as trailing commas when it comes to
> > adding removing arguments - a single line diff?
>
> It would.
>
> However, I see some merit in someone wanting trailing commas for diffs.
> Leading commas would break away from PSRs and one should not have to choose
> between a standard or clean reading.
>
> If someone chooses to lose their precious time implementing this, it would
> actually give some people a new feature (clean diffs while keeping PSR2
> compliance) without taking anything away from people who oppose this. This
> is not objectively bad, it just adds an option to the pool, which I think
> is good.
>
> I see no reason to allocate resources to make this happen, but if someone
> does allocate their personal time into coding this, I wouldn't oppose a
> merge.
>
> But again, I have no vote.
>
> I want to clarify, I have no objection to this - was just asking if making
the decision that way back then at FB would have merited the same result.
I'm in your boat, whether its added or not does not matter to me.

--f46d0444806f0056e2052229f520--