Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:99457
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: softfail (pb1.pair.com: domain golemon.com does not designate 74.125.82.45 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: php@golemon.com
In-Reply-To: <034f3ebf-95b8-a7cf-1279-77c7cf0424d7@gmail.com>
References: <CAFMT4Npoo_ZrRk-kk4C6KHYEtV93pU7Wmh0FhaPi6Z-9qkObaQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <7eaef49b-bf60-9aa1-e812-8430164e3178@garfieldtech.com> <f5992058-aecd-8bc4-08f8-2bfe722cd41e@fleshgrinder.com>
 <3F920987-38CB-42DD-888D-824430C36F14@gmail.com> <2f9e73c9-444a-11d0-459a-e261ea8a7080@telia.com>
 <CADqTB_hWrhBBQetfp=-LFR=OYALHwhs=mYd3vPQOYGGng26UsA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4077c099-2247-c3c1-7dee-02a6b25f8586@fleshgrinder.com> <CAObuZdtHXp=icU_aB8dWyjbzW-yZ0sSTW6ObmEsxTuvR679-Fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAObuZdvck_w5iEeH5Sz23pDS1T727gtN7pn8XCiPWBvqVWR5Ag@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAObuZdvYX8Yr4KQnzJNeF8CSJVwpxuDevV+6=w_J5J9gx5R8HQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <559b73f7-c40f-e593-f0e1-51b56210d7cb@telia.com> <2053A608-6B66-42FB-A6D7-7CC64E94DA6A@koalephant.com>
 <4FBDE643-1EBC-485A-A39F-7E28C5D4807A@koalephant.com> <e1c608a0-d046-d3a8-a360-d33c3aa75666@telia.com>
 <034f3ebf-95b8-a7cf-1279-77c7cf0424d7@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 12:22:20 -0400
Message-ID: <CAESVnVrfkK0wKKOJXegzRQ4n3c6P3doEYhaNaDF398=PFt1Jzg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC]Discuss] Syntax for Arrow Functions
From: pollita@php.net (Sara Golemon)

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:34 AM, Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com> wro=
te:
> On 08/06/2017 13:33, Bj=C3=B6rn Larsson wrote:
>>
>> One reason
>> (not the only one) for me to advocate =3D=3D> syntax is that it's the
>> same syntax as HACK
>
>
> I'm not a fan of this logic. Using Hack as a kind of prototyping-ground f=
or
> PHP features is fine, but since they don't have the same decision-making
> process as us, we should be looking at the *result* of their experience, =
not
> just following their lead. It may seem a subtle difference, but to me
> "because that choice has worked out well in Hack" is a much stronger
> argument than "because the small team working on Hack chose it that way a
> few years ago".
>
> In this case, there's some reason to question if it *has* worked out well=
 in
> Hack, given that IIRC they had to hack (no pun intended) their parser to
> implement it.
>
This is true.  The bodge to make (args...) =3D=3D> expr work in HackLang
isn't worthy of replicating in PHP.  If we can do it without a hack*
then by all means, let's not diverge the implementations.  But I
didn't want to maintain that lexer "is it a T_OP or a '('?" mess in
HHVM, I don't wanna maintain it in PHP either.

-Sara