Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:91474
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.43 as permitted sender)
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <1F.91.55238.41F10D65@pb1.pair.com>
 <CAHvhOfhYpnjkSjuo09TY7irhgW5UxNYZcWqtAr0iCcUAqJUgqw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKnqCEY7art1GUWG=Pm0wyPGQmYp0Dq8oxdohgBkSGq+O_BTZw@mail.gmail.com>
 <FA.10.10408.29514D65@pb1.pair.com> <56D42CD3.6020602@gmail.com>
 <DB.E1.07778.3D165D65@pb1.pair.com> <56D57DF4.8000906@gmail.com>
 <56D5D2AD.6070805@gmail.com> <56D5DDA6.4080607@fleshgrinder.com>
 <40.73.36499.548B6D65@pb1.pair.com>
Message-ID: <56D6BBD0.5010505@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 10:09:20 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <40.73.36499.548B6D65@pb1.pair.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC Proposal] var keyword deprecation/removal
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins)

Tony Marston wrote on 02/03/2016 09:53:
> wrote in message news:56D5DDA6.4080607@fleshgrinder.com...
>>
>> On 3/1/2016 6:34 PM, Rowan Collins wrote:
>>> Rowan Collins wrote on 01/03/2016 11:33:
>>>>
>>>> Secondly, violating visibility may have repercussions outside actual
>>>> errors.
>>>
>>>
>>> Incidentally, PHP itself encountered this a few years ago, where a
>>> release of libxml2 changed internal behaviour that was being relied on
>>> for a hack. The result was that entities like &gt; started silently
>>> disappearing from everyone's parsed XML if they compiled PHP against 
>>> the
>>> new library. See https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=45996 and
>>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnome.lib.xml.general/14610
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>
>> The misuse of "var" as it was explained is reason alone to take action.
>
> Just because one developer out of millions made a mistake is no reason 
> to punish those millions.
>
> If "var" can be abused then "public" can be abused in the same way, so 
> surely the only way to avoid the possibility of ANY abuse whatsoever 
> would be to remove "public" as well as "var".
>

I think the point was that *the difference between* "var" and "public" 
was being abused, which wouldn't be possible if there were only one keyword.

However, I agree that it's a very weak argument for removal (just as "I 
[ab]use 'var' to mean something different from 'public'" is a weak 
argument against removal).

Regards,
-- 
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]