Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:92763
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 157.56.111.140 as permitted sender)
To: Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>, Rowan Collins
	<rowan.collins@gmail.com>, <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <BY2PR0201MB178479B3AF8BD49583233034BF6E0@BY2PR0201MB1784.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
 <CA+kxMuSxAWkNXai0kgW1b1anSohn63frjw76puo1PyCB=xWx=g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFMT4NrAshwagmGr6RcadbnLGoe71huA7yYcLYhW-Yf7ohFHGg@mail.gmail.com>
 <571DD94B.3060604@zend.com> <571E63D0.8080800@gmail.com>
 <9c24f969-cb0e-cb46-a23c-6e06e7de7d79@gmail.com> <571E7C08.6010309@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <571F1B95.9030203@zend.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 10:41:09 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <571E7C08.6010309@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
SpamDiagnosticOutput: 1:23
SpamDiagnosticMetadata: NSPM
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Apr 2016 07:41:21.5867 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN1PR0201MB1789
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] PHP Attributes
From: dmitry@zend.com (Dmitry Stogov)



On 04/25/2016 11:20 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> No, but this is valid:
>>
>> @atrr(); function foo() { ... }
>>
>> That's perhaps a little too close for comfort...?
> That's different syntax. If you put ; in the middle of statement, it can
> change - "$c = $a + $b;" is not the same as "$c = $a; + $b;" - but
> nobody thinks + can not be used because of that. As I said, << and >>
> are existing operators too, so if you are creative enough, I'm sure you
> can find cases like that too.
>
Hi Stas,

You may try to replace attribute syntax with @attr(...) (without 
semicolon) into our PHP parser.
Note that we have LALR grammar + restrictions caused by semantic actions.
If you are able to do this, I'll add it into the RFC as an option.

Thanks. Dmitry.