Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:88837
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.217.178 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAESVnVrTL2xMq43DVEF0ZqayfwsPyZRbE=THTCgjOeRZgt8xNg@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>
	<CAESVnVrTL2xMq43DVEF0ZqayfwsPyZRbE=THTCgjOeRZgt8xNg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:51:25 -0600
Message-ID: <CAObuZdtDoiJAXLr3qdL7SknDPtYqtK3hx8S8qp18o7b26GEncA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sara Golemon <pollita@php.net>
Cc: =?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=047d7b5d9c070c8a0c05222a010a
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][DISCUSSION] Revisit trailing commas in function arguments
From: derokorian@gmail.com (Ryan Pallas)

--047d7b5d9c070c8a0c05222a010a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Sara Golemon <pollita@php.net> wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Ryan Pallas <derokorian@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > But its an entirely stylistic choice to use trailing commas for cleaner
> > diffs. You could also use leading  commas as well. If you made that a
> coding
> > standard for the organization, you would not have needed to implement
> > trailing am I right?
> >
> > Wouldn't this give the same benefit as trailing commas when it comes to
> > adding removing arguments - a single line diff?
> >
> IMO, that would solve the one small problem in exchange for a new
> small problem.  That of the cognitive overhead of parsing leading
> commas where standard practice calls for trailing commas.
>
> And before you counter than the final optional comma also comes with
> overhead, let me point out that the array consistency argument.  We
> have trailing commas there already, so no new mental overhead.
>
> Wasn't planning on countering, just trying to show that Hack made a
conscious choice to go this way. I personally don't see a benefit, as its
not hard to read a diff that has a new comma on a previous line following
by a new var/value on the next - but if people do then by all means add it
in :)

I do h ave one question I just thought of though... how does the allowance
of trailing comma work with the splat operator (...)? I'm assuming a
function call/definition may only have one or the other, is that correct?

--047d7b5d9c070c8a0c05222a010a--