Add another php syntax for simplify code

0. when dot object opeator is enable, use small sign and add sign [<+] be equivalent to [.] for string concat mark.
   compatibility is achieved through configuration switches.
   syntax ：
   >>> $a = 'str0';
   >>> $a .= 'str1' <+ 'str2' <+ 'str3' <+ $str_var <+ strcall();
   the concat equal sign[.=] not change

1. use dot mark[.] same with [->]
   syntax:
   >>> $a = new stdClass;
   >>> $a.b =1; same with $a->b = 1 when dot object opeator is enable in php.ini
   >>> $a.get(); same with $a->get() when dot object opeator is enable in php.ini

2. colon [:] same with [=>] in array declaration statement
   syntax:
   >>> $a = [ 'b' : 1, 'c' : 3 ]; same with $a = ['b'=>1, 'c' => 3]

3. another class declaration statement, cant not use [extends] and [implement] keyword
   syntax:
   >>> class Objects(ParentClass): Interface1,Interface2 {}
   same with
   >>> class Objects extends ParentClass implement Interface1,Interface2 {}

     anonymous class
     >>> $obj = new($arg1,$arg2) class(ParentClass) : implement Interface1,Interface2 {}
     same with
     >>> $obj = new class($arg1,$arg2) extends ParentClass implement Interface1,Interface2{}
   

4. another class method declaration statement, omit [function] keyword is allowable
   syntax:
   >>> public method_name($args) {}
   same with
   >>> public function method_name($args) {}

5. restriction public magic method synax sugar, omit [public][function] keywords and duoble underline[__] is allowable, only __get() __set() __call() __callStatic() __toString() __sleep() __wakeup() __serialize() __unserialize() is availabled
   syntax:
   >>> class A {
   >>> get() {
   >>> }
   >>> call() {
   >>> }
   >>> }
   same with:
   >>> class A {
   >>> public function __get() {
   >>> }
   >>> public function __call() {
   >>> }
   >>> }

The implement and syntax see:
https://github.com/chopins/php-src/blob/fast_grammar/FastSyntax.md

In my opinion, it is generally a bad idea to support different syntax
based on an INI setting. This easily leads to confusion for those
reading the code.

I don't see much point in these "simplifications" anyway, except maybe
for the shorter array literals. Note though, that there has been RFC[1]
about a similar syntax, but that had been declined.

[1] https://wiki.php.net/rfc/bare_name_array_literal

--
Christoph M. Becker