Den 2019-10-06 kl. 15:41, skrev Mark Randall:
On 06/10/2019 14:18, Reinis Rozitis wrote:
Since `` are used for literal strings (for poorly chosen reserved
words as field, table names (which happens from time to time)) in
MySQL (multiline) queries I doubt there is a simple way to
distinguish an
Before replying (quickly) to this, I want to point out, again, that it’s
mind boggling we have to start discussing non-topics and spend time, energy
and mental strength on this endless stream of out-of-the-blue deprecation
proposals.
On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 5:32 Theodore Brown wrote:
>
> I did som
On 08/10/2019 04:31, Theodore Brown wrote:
In 8 of these, the backtick uses are exclusively in test files or other
scripts not part of the library source code. Then there are 11 packages
with one or two uses each, and only 2 packages with more than two occurrences.
Raw numbers:https://gist.githu
> Le 8 oct. 2019 à 10:26, Björn Larsson a écrit :
>
> Den 2019-10-06 kl. 15:41, skrev Mark Randall:
>> On 06/10/2019 14:18, Reinis Rozitis wrote:
>>> Since `` are used for literal strings (for poorly chosen reserved words as
>>> field, table names (which happens from time to time)) in MySQL (
> Which is why ANY unnecessary changes that need to be made as a
> result are just painful often without ANY gain what so ever on either
side?
One gain that's very often overlooked on this list, is teaching a better
PHP to new generations. It IS confusing if PHP has more than one way to do
one thi
Den 2019-10-08 kl. 11:00, skrev Claude Pache:
Le 8 oct. 2019 à 10:26, Björn Larsson a écrit :
Den 2019-10-06 kl. 15:41, skrev Mark Randall:
On 06/10/2019 14:18, Reinis Rozitis wrote:
Since `` are used for literal strings (for poorly chosen reserved words as
field, table names (which happens
> Le 8 oct. 2019 à 11:44, Björn Larsson a écrit :
>
> Den 2019-10-08 kl. 11:00, skrev Claude Pache:
>>> Le 8 oct. 2019 à 10:26, Björn Larsson a écrit :
>>>
>>> Den 2019-10-06 kl. 15:41, skrev Mark Randall:
On 06/10/2019 14:18, Reinis Rozitis wrote:
> Since `` are used for literal st
On 08.10.2019 at 11:44, Björn Larsson wrote:
> Den 2019-10-08 kl. 11:00, skrev Claude Pache:
>
>> When evaluating the _unique_ cost of migrating legacy code, it should
>> be balanced with the _continual_ cost of keeping the feature. That
>> includes:
>>
>> * People wondering what that strange synt
Den 2019-10-08 kl. 12:24, skrev Christoph M. Becker:
On 08.10.2019 at 11:44, Björn Larsson wrote:
Den 2019-10-08 kl. 11:00, skrev Claude Pache:
When evaluating the _unique_ cost of migrating legacy code, it should
be balanced with the _continual_ cost of keeping the feature. That
includes:
*
> -Original Message-
> From: Benjamin Morel [mailto:benjamin.mo...@gmail.com]
>
> One gain that's very often overlooked on this list, is teaching a better PHP
> to
> new generations. It IS confusing if PHP has more than one way to do one thing,
Not directly related to this RFC but out of
On Fri, 2019-10-04 at 16:45 +0100, Mark Randall wrote:
> Hi Internals,
>
> I put forward the following RFC "Deprecate Backtick Operator (V2)"
> for
> discussion.
>
I use them from time to time when using PHP as a better shell scripting
language. Quite useful in that context. Deprecating them m
> Le 8 oct. 2019 à 12:24, Reindl Harald (privat) a écrit :
>
>
>
> Am 08.10.19 um 11:00 schrieb Claude Pache:
>> * People trying to deactivate functions executing external programs (such as
>> `shell_exec`) using the "disable_function" ini directive, wondering how to
>> deactivate the back
Hello,
would say intellectually speaking I could accept the argument of
time\investment\code however
in reality figuring out for someone having a minimum of shell experience in
that case, would figure
out in 5 minutes if he is very slow minded; none the less, learning new
features, new apis, tha
On Sun, Oct 6, 2019 at 9:18 AM Reinis Rozitis wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Olumide Samson [mailto:oludons...@gmail.com]
> >
> > it should be deprecated for exec usage since they both do same thing
>
> With that logic does the same thing and is hard to find in internet search
The problem with the backtick operator syntax is that it is an obscure
but innocent-looking syntax for something that can have a huge,
perhaps devastating, impact.
It is rare enough in the field (as far as regular packages and
applications are concerned) that you can spend 5 years working with
PHP
> On 8 Oct 2019, at 22:21, Andreas Hennings wrote:
>
> The problem with the backtick operator syntax is that it is an obscure
> but innocent-looking syntax for something that can have a huge,
> perhaps devastating, impact.
> It is rare enough in the field (as far as regular packages and
> appl
Den 2019-10-08 kl. 17:49, skrev Stephen Reay:
On 8 Oct 2019, at 22:21, Andreas Hennings wrote:
The problem with the backtick operator syntax is that it is an obscure
but innocent-looking syntax for something that can have a huge,
perhaps devastating, impact.
It is rare enough in the field (as
Hi!
> When evaluating the _unique_ cost of migrating legacy code, it should be
> balanced with the _continual_ cost of keeping the feature. That includes:
>
> * People wondering what that strange syntax does, or, worse, mistaking it
> with a variation of string literal.
> * Difficulty to search
Den 2019-10-04 kl. 17:45, skrev Mark Randall:
Hi Internals,
I put forward the following RFC "Deprecate Backtick Operator (V2)" for
discussion.
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/deprecate-backtick-operator-v2
I believe it is at least worth a discussion as to the pros and cons of
deprecating this func
Hi!
> PHP to new generations. It IS confusing if PHP has more than one way to do
> one thing, and if one of them is considered better than the other nowadays,
No it's not. At least no more than anything else in life. There's always
alternatives to do something. And PHP has always been a language
> On 9 Oct 2019, at 01:08, Björn Larsson wrote:
>
> Den 2019-10-08 kl. 17:49, skrev Stephen Reay:
>>
>>> On 8 Oct 2019, at 22:21, Andreas Hennings wrote:
>>>
>>> The problem with the backtick operator syntax is that it is an obscure
>>> but innocent-looking syntax for something that can hav
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 2:11 PM Stanislav Malyshev
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > When evaluating the _unique_ cost of migrating legacy code, it should be
> balanced with the _continual_ cost of keeping the feature. That includes:
> >
> > * People wondering what that strange syntax does, or, worse, mistaking
Den 2019-10-08 kl. 20:22, skrev Stephen Reay:
On 9 Oct 2019, at 01:08, Björn Larsson wrote:
Den 2019-10-08 kl. 17:49, skrev Stephen Reay:
On 8 Oct 2019, at 22:21, Andreas Hennings wrote:
The problem with the backtick operator syntax is that it is an obscure
but innocent-looking syntax for
Hi!
> I was going to learn c++, but then I came across these weird operators
>>> and <<. At first I thought they were heredoc, but, that obviously
> wasn't the case. My next guess is that they were some sort of strict
> comparison === is more strict than ==, so I figured >> is more strict
> than >
> On 9 Oct 2019, at 01:34, Björn Larsson wrote:
>
> Den 2019-10-08 kl. 20:22, skrev Stephen Reay:
>>
>>> On 9 Oct 2019, at 01:08, Björn Larsson wrote:
>>>
>>> Den 2019-10-08 kl. 17:49, skrev Stephen Reay:
> On 8 Oct 2019, at 22:21, Andreas Hennings wrote:
>
> The problem with
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019, 20:48 Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > I was going to learn c++, but then I came across these weird operators
> >>> and <<. At first I thought they were heredoc, but, that obviously
> > wasn't the case. My next guess is that they were some sort of strict
> > comparison =
My, my this is a heated topic.
I am commenting in part because I do not have a dog in this hunt. I am okay
leaving it, I am okay if it is deprecated. There are other things for PHP that
I care far more about than this RFC. So...
I am wondering if everyone participating in this discussion wou
@Mike Schinkel,
a middle ground about/with silliness? there is none, for people in their
right mind; should people really find/force
themselves into conciliation about non-sense? I don't think so and mostly;
I have no say about deprecating that;
but is that a priority? does it harm anyone? someone
> More generally, people take time in understanding the peculiarities of that
> uncommon feature which is the backtick operator. This is a real cost.
Is this a generally agreed-principle that the PHP community believes is
important?
If so, shouldn't we quantify what the cost is and who would
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 1:23 PM M. W. Moe wrote:
> @Mike Schinkel,
>
> a middle ground about/with silliness? there is none, for people in their
> right mind; should people really find/force
> themselves into conciliation about non-sense? I don't think so and mostly;
> I have no say about deprecati
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 10:12 PM Mike Schinkel wrote:
> My, my this is a heated topic.
>
> I am commenting in part because I do not have a dog in this hunt. I am
> okay leaving it, I am okay if it is deprecated. There are other things for
> PHP that I care far more about than this RFC. So...
>
> a middle ground about/with silliness? there is none, for people in their
> right mind; should people really find/force
> themselves into conciliation about non-sense? I don't think so and mostly; I
> have no say about deprecating that;
> but is that a priority? does it harm anyone? someone have
Hello,
I answered you privately about this kind of false assumptions and
projections. (I have an education)
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 1:38 PM Mike Schinkel wrote:
> > a middle ground about/with silliness? there is none, for people in their
> right mind; should people really find/force
> > themselv
> On Oct 8, 2019, at 4:29 PM, Lynn wrote:
> My middle ground is a vote, regardless of outcome.
If a vote is the middle ground then why the need to participate in any
discussion?
Also, how is a vote a middle ground? A vote ensures that one sides wins and the
other side looses. IOW, a zero-sum
Hello,
what you write and advocate for can't be heard by a vast majority of people
here; because they are just not North-American; somehow
that's a very interesting trait; most of people despise `kind` moralism.
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 2:14 PM Mike Schinkel wrote:
> > On Oct 8, 2019, at 4:29 PM
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 2:25 PM M. W. Moe wrote:
> Hello,
>
> what you write and advocate for can't be heard by a vast majority of people
> here; because they are just not North-American; somehow
> that's a very interesting trait; most of people despise `kind` moralism.
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 a
On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 22:38 Mike Schinkel wrote:
> > a middle ground about/with silliness? there is none, for people in their
> right mind; should people really find/force
> > themselves into conciliation about non-sense? I don't think so and
> mostly; I have no say about deprecating that;
> > bu
> On Oct 8, 2019, at 5:34 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> So while I sympathize with the effort to find a compromise - encouraging more
> of these contentious proposals (by accommodating them at some level) is not
> the way.
Ok, but...
> The real middle ground is to go for some form of opt-in soluti
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019, 3:30 PM Chase Peeler wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 6, 2019 at 9:18 AM Reinis Rozitis wrote:
>
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Olumide Samson [mailto:oludons...@gmail.com]
> > >
> > > it should be deprecated for exec usage since they both do same thing
> >
> > With that
Hi!
> If you feel you want all those functions deprecated in favor of any other,
> put up a RFC whenever you want to(No one is stopping you from that).
That's part of the problem. RFC should be for something that is
necessary and beneficial for the whole community, doubly and triply so
when we're
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019, at 6:26 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > If you feel you want all those functions deprecated in favor of any other,
> > put up a RFC whenever you want to(No one is stopping you from that).
>
> That's part of the problem. RFC should be for something that is
> necessar
On 09/10/2019 00:26, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
That's part of the problem. RFC should be for something that is
necessary and beneficial for the whole community, doubly and triply so
when we're talking about BC breaks. It shouldn't be just "whatever I
want, let me put it to a vote". RFCs are not a
Hello,
the point Stanislav is really not about whom; that's about thinking, work,
effort, personal walk thru a problem;
and I am sorry he is fully right; live example:
"I think that's been inconsistencies from the part of early contributors
which is the same reason we are having "haystack and nee
43 matches
Mail list logo
