Hello Bastian, id like to see '<?php=' too.
marcus Monday, November 28, 2005, 9:56:56 AM, you wrote: > What concerns me most is that <?php= does not work, regardless if short > tags will be disabled or not in php6. I currently use <%= to counter > this, but I am most certainly *not* happy with it. > So a clean <?php= solution would be ideal, so I wouldn't have to care > about xml/xsl files parsed and neither about my templates growing too > large because of php overhead. > Sara Golemon wrote: >>> I recall this being discussed before, but not what came of it: is there >>> a problem with just ignoring <?foo where foo is anything other than php >>> or =? <?foo or <?bar or <?whatever is a parse error anyway so I very >>> much doubt there's any BC break. Unless someone's program relies on >>> parse errors. >>> >> The problem there becomes legacy support for: >> >> <?foo();?> >> >> And before you say "just watch for parens" there's also: >> >> <?foo::bar();?> >> >> and a much more insiduous example: >> >> <?die ?> >> >> no semicolon, no parens, no paamayim nekudotayim, nothing but a >> perfectly valid looking PI tag. >> >> -Sara Best regards, Marcus -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
