Thanks Johannes, I slipped over it but would have never found the
discussion to it.
I run over it and the summary is: Many people like it and those that
don't have brought arguments, that are present here again. The
discussion is almost 4 years old by now, and people are complaining over
things getting implemented in php back in time, which are now
implemented and turned out to be ok - I expect the same to happen with
this idea.
Main contra argument is, people are not able to grep for 'function *'
anymore, which I guess is a minority of people and they can write
themselves a shell-script which makes it possible to search for
functions again, so not a big deal. However, the more important
statement behind this is, who is the more important crowd of people that
are targeted with changes like these? Primary or secondary consumers?
... but see my other mail, which conatains answers.
Though, I have one question left regarding the old rfc? Why it has been
gone inactive and basically slept since then?
Thanks
Thomas Gossmann
Am 04.10.14 um 19:44 schrieb Johannes Schlüter:
On Fri, 2014-10-03 at 18:21 +0200, Thomas Gossmann wrote:
I guess this was a discussion earlier, though I wasn't able to find
anything about it. Would love to hear, what pdt-internals (re-)think
about that topic.
Go to wiki.php.net/rfc look at the titles containing "function" and you
will see "Make T_FUNCTION in method declarations optional" which was
added by me. https://wiki.php.net/rfc/optional-t-function
Since proposing I was convinced this wasn't good. Please bring new
arguments. Discussion was in this thread
http://news.php.net/php.internals/50628 (another viewer might be better
to find the ~64 followups)
johannes
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
