Hi,
I am searching for some evidence in the PHP source code that the
possibility of omitting the closing PHP tag is absolutely intentional,
and in fact part of the language syntax, and therefore it is going to be
supported indefinitely. Digging for T_CLOSE_TAG and similar stuff have
lead me to nothing.
Actually I would like to clarify and possibly extend the note on page:
http://php.net/manual/en/basic-syntax.instruction-separation
Also if you have any positive notes on not using the closing tag (or any
negative thereof :), please do let me know.
Thanks,
Goba (PHP Documentation Editor)
Hi,
I am searching for some evidence in the PHP source code that the
possibility of omitting the closing PHP tag is absolutely intentional,
and in fact part of the language syntax, and therefore it is going
to be
supported indefinitely. Digging forT_CLOSE_TAGand similar stuff have
lead me to nothing.Actually I would like to clarify and possibly extend the note on page:
http://php.net/manual/en/basic-syntax.instruction-separationAlso if you have any positive notes on not using the closing tag
(or any
negative thereof :), please do let me know.
Benefit: No unintentional leakage of whitespace (following a closing ?
).
George
George Schlossnagle wrote:
Also if you have any positive notes on not using the closing tag (or any
negative thereof :), please do let me know.Benefit: No unintentional leakage of whitespace (following a closing ? >).
Well, the intention of the basic syntax manual page is to point this
exact advantage out, but it is probably badly worded :)
Goba
I am searching for some evidence in the PHP source code that the
possibility of omitting the closing PHP tag is absolutely intentional,
and in fact part of the language syntax, and therefore it is going to be
supported indefinitely. Digging forT_CLOSE_TAGand similar stuff have
lead me to nothing.
I can't imagine a situation where that level of BC breakage would EVER be
permitted. In fact, last I heard it was recommended practice for PEAR files
to omit the end tag.
I suppose it might accidently break if include were ever shifted to C style
inclusion, but that breakage would wind up being considered a bug in the
"new feature" and could be easily fixed by automatically reseting the lexer
state before and after the include statement.
Actually I would like to clarify and possibly extend the note on page:
http://php.net/manual/en/basic-syntax.instruction-separation
An example might be helpful...
"<?php echo 'Foo'; ?>" and "<?php echo 'Foo';" are interpreted identically
by PHP.
-Sara
It is quite intentional and will stick around forever :)
Andi
At 01:14 PM 8/29/2005, Sara Golemon wrote:
I am searching for some evidence in the PHP source code that the
possibility of omitting the closing PHP tag is absolutely intentional,
and in fact part of the language syntax, and therefore it is going to be
supported indefinitely. Digging forT_CLOSE_TAGand similar stuff have
lead me to nothing.I can't imagine a situation where that level of BC breakage would EVER be
permitted. In fact, last I heard it was recommended practice for PEAR files
to omit the end tag.I suppose it might accidently break if include were ever shifted to C style
inclusion, but that breakage would wind up being considered a bug in the
"new feature" and could be easily fixed by automatically reseting the lexer
state before and after the include statement.Actually I would like to clarify and possibly extend the note on page:
http://php.net/manual/en/basic-syntax.instruction-separationAn example might be helpful...
"<?php echo 'Foo'; ?>" and "<?php echo 'Foo';" are interpreted identically
by PHP.-Sara