Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:97476 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 38700 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2016 23:55:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 27 Dec 2016 23:55:11 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=cmbecker69@gmx.de; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=cmbecker69@gmx.de; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmx.de designates 212.227.17.22 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: cmbecker69@gmx.de X-Host-Fingerprint: 212.227.17.22 mout.gmx.net Received: from [212.227.17.22] ([212.227.17.22:53071] helo=mout.gmx.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 99/AF-04761-D5FF2685 for ; Tue, 27 Dec 2016 18:55:10 -0500 Received: from [192.168.2.109] ([217.82.227.120]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MYKGj-1c0BBJ43tp-00VB59; Wed, 28 Dec 2016 00:55:05 +0100 To: =?UTF-8?Q?Midori_Ko=c3=a7ak?= , PHP Internals References: Cc: Sara Golemon Message-ID: <257926dd-12cd-a52b-8bf5-91b97594fbb6@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2016 00:55:43 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:ZAR3XOiatdgg0GG5sHNHvwt7WNizwkBZFMStRGGbWaJ3jvQl7CZ +0lClq/JiqjFz6FAoxn9U3U6kgq5bAmVA1kEJ5a0XcBUM9Tbl5z4ziH5D6JDcibx73+xro2 gDGzCq4pTIl4UVPhheCZ2sSVulEId9A0D0aKYcZFu8/rJJARWFPUFkFeVhmp+IovMW5GdCE /mP3spU4DOxH8E+wGHOww== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:cZKNDIEFToU=:e508vRj/P0f/zXzIiZOu+X MqTgtzVianfPUJbbFiInQ+IImzfNRFIxvhS2a5Ikpm0hiHzdeTUGAMhCACfgVortTlhdU9o22 OlfqJMmJJK19Lgly/xfLZ0S0dpDpF2wBmwqT1QwmKtSbE2Kju3Ts5G/kifHPSK0sbwkk9PFEk MHmJue4+A+VpgsDR3F5chRxjf3tjeVmInPe2r9Pq36aXmU4ASSNtUILz2P7cpR5foxnuisEKW 1gNYDIQZRlTRrvkoWSh+Vvy+HP4+JHI7F1WrypjAG6zQlOwmsWARjZqUdKK9FkSfR8601+r1/ nmS42vUDHZdHmXxZrCYe1whouuV1hxlIGPSmZ8swz/Ht7QDA88ZPed03ch9s80brTPG8pCFc/ DI0hP8UuSBCATohincEgMFhXcjMJXOaVaNQ5oGMgJ6BJ2slE1LalsvnaPHn9NRgbPViruT2sY BLM6PdC6noIgVVTAYAgLBvTBe+lLdkyWZcJssT9dINK7xfi5dFnourk6NEglxh0qxlvDWpK6R OICF+e35VMWChAaaEFZEed3T5Asy402SOFxeaRY+mgK0j15lR5Zb2DeSwqyssYVW/1wSL03Gt o2i+FWgkvsEVwyk1ABClXrwojJXekBNjrHJiEyoH29j2yyLOjy7XtWRaksEYBuw05r85aZ/TI fJlnoXKbZmbDw0tMdfT2kDWsxTGB5v/SWuBZWKfqLmZbdjnKuq9MwgLub6oaZuNRTtBk1OprA NdnGHpUdONJmls5ftz/l0d6LM6RWgpE25NMihaQIhlSWL4fqaoOICVI2gSIMenvICjOzZ59Fp nrK6R62Hc58KD2E84KF6+pjvrCudQ== Subject: Re: ??= operator From: cmbecker69@gmx.de ("Christoph M. Becker") On 22.12.2016 at 20:58, Midori Koçak wrote: > Dear internals, > > Remember ??=, was accepted with 37/4 votes? > > Since then I did not have time to implement the ??= because I did not have > time > > Hence I am currently unemployed and continuously passing tech interviews > and failing non-technical 2. rounds, I have plenty of time, so I decided to > going back to implementations. Sometime ago I got ?:= implementation from > @saramg, for cheating but I see that it was not implemented due to edge > cases. I think I missed some discussion for a while, so I am unaware of the > cases. > > Was there a decision about it? Or should I give up trying to implement this? The latest relevant info I have regarding this issue is . -- Christoph M. Becker