> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Lynch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 07 February 2007 02:34
>
> I was specifically thinking of the sheer number of emails to
> PHP-General that would result.
>
> Even if 90% of the newbies "get it" without any research, and
> 5% more figure it ou
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Cummings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 06 February 2007 16:09
>
> I know how much you want to feel special, but here's the
> definition of "read". Your description of how you interpret
> what you see falls into this definition:
Oh, no fair! You'v
On Tue, February 6, 2007 11:26 am, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
> On Feb 5, 2007, at 3:37 PM, Richard Lynch wrote:
>
>> Yes, and it makes life miserable for some of us...
>>
>> Is that a good reason to extend that misery to yet another operator?
>
> Richard, please. This is not advanced OO stuff or anyth
On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 15:41 +, Ford, Mike wrote:
> On 06 February 2007 14:42, Robert Cummings wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 14:08 +, Ford, Mike wrote:
> > > On 05 February 2007 17:29, Brian Moon wrote:
> > > > That is why you have coding standards. Our doucment states that
> > > > th
On Feb 5, 2007, at 3:37 PM, Richard Lynch wrote:
Yes, and it makes life miserable for some of us...
Is that a good reason to extend that misery to yet another operator?
Richard, please. This is not advanced OO stuff or anything close.
It's an operator. Give PHP users (even newbies) some cre
On 06 February 2007 14:42, Robert Cummings wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 14:08 +, Ford, Mike wrote:
> > On 05 February 2007 17:29, Brian Moon wrote:
> > > That is why you have coding standards. Our doucment states that
> > > this should be written as:
> > >
> > > $a = array(
> > > 1 => a
Hi.
Our 'newbie' at least has a good chance of figuring out
$a = [1,2,3] vs.$a = array(1,2,3)
is different than
$a = foobar(1,2,3)
I am probably out of my depth here...but I actually find the argument
about wether to introduce this syntax or not, very entertaining...it'
how it is different? How explaining array written as [] so much harder
that explaining array written as ()? What exactly constitutes the
problem?
Here's the difference:
You can Google for 'array' and learn a lot.
If you try to Google for [] you don't learn squat.
Try it and see.
So our 'newb
On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 04:16:28PM +0100, Christian Schneider wrote:
> Alain Williams wrote:
> > Anyway: it makes php look like perl -- and that would never do :-)
>
> Can we please stop that FUD? (even if it is meant as a joke)
No: it was NOT a serious point. What is wrong with the occasional gr
Alain Williams wrote:
> Anyway: it makes php look like perl -- and that would never do :-)
Can we please stop that FUD? (even if it is meant as a joke)
... if at all then you might say it looks like Javascript, Python or
Ruby. Perl uses an ugly mix of () and [] to emulate multi-dimensional
arrays
On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 09:41:34AM -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 14:08 +, Ford, Mike wrote:
> > On 05 February 2007 17:29, Brian Moon wrote:
> > > That is why you have coding standards. Our doucment states that this
> > > should be written as:
> > >
> > > $a = array(
On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 14:08 +, Ford, Mike wrote:
> On 05 February 2007 17:29, Brian Moon wrote:
> > That is why you have coding standards. Our doucment states that this
> > should be written as:
> >
> > $a = array(
> > 1 => array('pears', 'apples'),
> > 2 => array('juice', 'oranges')
On 05 February 2007 17:29, Brian Moon wrote:
> Ford, Mike wrote:
> > > I don't find:
> > >
> > > $a = [1 => ['pears', 'apples'], 2 => ['juice', 'oranges']];
> > >
> > > any less readable than:
> > >
> > > $a = array(1 => array('pears', 'apples'), 2 => array('juice',
> > > 'oranges'));
> > >
>
On Mon, February 5, 2007 1:18 pm, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
> I don't buy the "searching docs is easier" argument. There are plenty
> of operators and such that are hard to search for.
Yes, and it makes life miserable for some of us...
Is that a good reason to extend that misery to yet another opera
Put it this way: Are you willing to answer EVERY PHP-General question
asking what this is? ;-)
Cuz I'm sure not willing to do it.
I'm not willing to answer newbie questions on regular basis, but that
has nothing to do with anything - I was unwilling to do it with any
syntax. I just think ina
On Mon, February 5, 2007 12:24 pm, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>
>> When a new PHP user asks you "What is an array?" you will
>> understand.
>
> If someone is not familiar with the concept of the array at all, it
> doesn't matter if it's written as array(1,2,3) or [1,2,3]. That's not
> what we ar
On Mon, February 5, 2007 12:01 pm, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>> you, they don't have a clue what they are doing. $a = [1,2,3];
>> would
>> not mean jack sqat to those folks. And as stated, finding docs on
>> that
>
> How hard can that be? If one is smart enough to do computer
> programming,
> how
$a = array( 1, 2, 3 ).
It's not hard. I don't think anybody ever argued it's hard to
understand. The argument was it's too verbose once you talk about
multi-dimensional arrays with a lot of sub-arrays containing in turn
even more sub-arrays - entire code becomes packed with repetitions
On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 10:01 -0800, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> > you, they don't have a clue what they are doing. $a = [1,2,3]; would
> > not mean jack sqat to those folks. And as stated, finding docs on that
>
> How hard can that be? If one is smart enough to do computer programming,
> how h
Andrei Zmievski wrote:
I don't buy the "searching docs is easier" argument. There are plenty of
operators and such that are hard to search for.
Good point, but, were there pre-existing solutions to those operators
when they were created? I think that is the point that Zeev was making.
We ha
I don't buy the "searching docs is easier" argument. There are plenty
of operators and such that are hard to search for.
-Andrei
On Feb 5, 2007, at 11:07 AM, Brian Moon wrote:
If someone is not familiar with the concept of the array at all, it
doesn't matter if it's written as array(1,2,3) or
If someone is not familiar with the concept of the array at all, it
doesn't matter if it's written as array(1,2,3) or [1,2,3]. That's not
what we are discussing right now.
My point is that if its written array(1,2,3) that have something to
search for in the docs. The new proposed syntax remov
When a new PHP user asks you "What is an array?" you will understand.
If someone is not familiar with the concept of the array at all, it
doesn't matter if it's written as array(1,2,3) or [1,2,3]. That's not
what we are discussing right now.
Its clear that not all the folks on internals ha
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
you, they don't have a clue what they are doing. $a = [1,2,3]; would
not mean jack sqat to those folks. And as stated, finding docs on that
How hard can that be? If one is smart enough to do computer programming,
how hard can it be to know $a=[1,2,3] is an array? L
you, they don't have a clue what they are doing. $a = [1,2,3]; would
not mean jack sqat to those folks. And as stated, finding docs on that
How hard can that be? If one is smart enough to do computer programming,
how hard can it be to know $a=[1,2,3] is an array? Like, what else could
it be
I agree. Syntax is good, if we make it work both ways.
-Andrei
On Feb 4, 2007, at 8:59 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
My 2c - unless we also make it behave like a list() when in assignment
context - I think it will confusing.
So I'm +1 if we make it work as both list() and array(), and -1
otherwis
Ford, Mike wrote:
I don't find:
$a = [1 => ['pears', 'apples'], 2 => ['juice', 'oranges']];
any less readable than:
$a = array(1 => array('pears', 'apples'), 2 => array('juice',
'oranges'));
Quite the opposite actually :)
Me too - I go beyond Edin on this one, as I find the array() versio
On 04 February 2007 21:41, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 23:27 04-02-07, Pierre wrote:
> > On 2/4/07, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > At 20:14 04-02-07, Pierre wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > On 2/4/07, Ilia Alshanetsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > I personally find array extr
On 04 February 2007 18:38, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
> Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> > Yes, you will come across it if its added.
> > I find the Javascript syntax confusing to read as well. However more
> > importantly I do not see the point in adding this sugar to save 5
> > chars.
>
> Nested arrays
On 04 February 2007 07:25, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I thought I may have brought this up a long time ago but
> couldn't find anything in the archives.
> For a long time already I've been thinking about possibly
> adding a new syntax for array(...) which would be shorter. I'd suggest
> [...].
On 02/04/2007 10:25 AM, Andi Gutmans wrote:
Hi,
I thought I may have brought this up a long time ago but couldn't find anything
in the archives.
For a long time already I've been thinking about possibly adding a new syntax
for array(...) which would be shorter. I'd suggest
[...]. While I am us
phpxcache wrote:
most ppl who works on web pages have to know what javascript
> is, so there isn't any difficulty for ppl to get used ...
You give brand new PHP hackers too much credit. Sure professional PHP
developers do have to work with Javascript. But, working on Phorum and
see real use
On Sun, February 4, 2007 7:53 am, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
> On 2/4/07, Nico Haase <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hallöchen,
>> *Johannes Schlüter* schrub:
>> > - Without keyword it's hard to find the documentation if you
>> don't know
>> >that syntax
>>
>> Well, this is the same with HEREDOC si
On Sun, February 4, 2007 8:58 am, Christian Schneider wrote:
> Plus you could
> still
> use array() if you really wanted to.
Yes, but sooner or later I am stuck with somebody else's code who
decided to write the non-array version, and I'm sitting there
wondering what [bleep] this code is doing.
T
On Sun, February 4, 2007 2:46 pm, Stefan Walk wrote:
> Steph wrote:
>> Hi Stas,
>>
>>> By pure coincidence, I was doing a bunch of javascript work lately
>>> too, and I find [] syntax OK. From readability POV it's not much
>>> difference, but much less clutter if you have really massive data
>>> ar
On Sun, February 4, 2007 10:59 am, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> My 2c - unless we also make it behave like a list() when in
> assignment context - I think it will confusing.
>
> So I'm +1 if we make it work as both list() and array(), and -1
> otherwise.
Can you show by example what this means?
I'm seei
On Sun, February 4, 2007 1:25 am, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I thought I may have brought this up a long time ago but couldn't find
> anything in the archives.
> For a long time already I've been thinking about possibly adding a new
> syntax for array(...) which would be shorter. I'd suggest
> [...]. Wh
On Sun, 2007-02-04 at 19:38 +0100, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
> Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> > Yes, you will come across it if its added.
> > I find the Javascript syntax confusing to read as well. However more
> > importantly I do not see the point in adding this sugar to save 5 chars.
>
> Nested array
On 2/4/07, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 23:51 04-02-07, Pierre wrote:
>On 2/4/07, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>One of the key guidelines of the language definition process of PHP
>>was that we don't want multiple ways of doing the same thing, and we
>>don't buy the ar
At 23:51 04-02-07, Pierre wrote:
On 2/4/07, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One of the key guidelines of the language definition process of PHP
was that we don't want multiple ways of doing the same thing, and we
don't buy the argument of 'why do you care? you can still do it the
other
On 2/4/07, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One of the key guidelines of the language definition process of PHP
was that we don't want multiple ways of doing the same thing, and we
don't buy the argument of 'why do you care? you can still do it the
other way'.
We already have many ways
At 23:27 04-02-07, Pierre wrote:
On 2/4/07, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 20:14 04-02-07, Pierre wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On 2/4/07, Ilia Alshanetsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>I personally find array extremely clear, in recent weeks I had to do
>>A LOT of JavaScript work where the array sy
On 2/4/07, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 20:14 04-02-07, Pierre wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On 2/4/07, Ilia Alshanetsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>I personally find array extremely clear, in recent weeks I had to do
>>A LOT of JavaScript work where the array syntax works in a manner you
>>sugge
At 20:14 04-02-07, Pierre wrote:
Hi,
On 2/4/07, Ilia Alshanetsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I personally find array extremely clear, in recent weeks I had to do
A LOT of JavaScript work where the array syntax works in a manner you
suggest for PHP and its a massive pain. It does not make for a v
Fine, but in javascript there is only one option. That's the difference.
- Steph
a = Array(1,2,3)
a = [1,2,3]
I stand corrected. Apologies for the noise.
- Steph
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Steph wrote:
> Hi Stas,
>
>> By pure coincidence, I was doing a bunch of javascript work lately
>> too, and I find [] syntax OK. From readability POV it's not much
>> difference, but much less clutter if you have really massive data
>> array - no array() things which take half of the space.
>
> F
Hi Stas,
By pure coincidence, I was doing a bunch of javascript work lately too,
and I find [] syntax OK. From readability POV it's not much difference,
but much less clutter if you have really massive data array - no array()
things which take half of the space.
Fine, but in javascript there
IA>>I personally find array extremely clear, in recent weeks I had to do A
IA>>LOT of JavaScript work where the array syntax works in a manner you
IA>>suggest for PHP and its a massive pain. It does not make for a very
By pure coincidence, I was doing a bunch of javascript work lately too,
and
Hello Pierre,
as much as you are true we never accepted the argument that some simply
can skip a certain syntax or feature.
best regards
marcus
Sunday, February 4, 2007, 7:14:19 PM, you wrote:
> Hi,
> On 2/4/07, Ilia Alshanetsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I personally find array extremely
On Sun, 4 Feb 2007, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
> I don't find:
>
> $a = [1 => ['pears', 'apples'], 2 => ['juice', 'oranges']];
>
> any less readable than:
>
> $a = array(1 => array('pears', 'apples'), 2 => array('juice', 'oranges'));
>
> Quite the opposite actually :)
That's a personal thing, and
On Sat, 3 Feb 2007, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I thought I may have brought this up a long time ago but couldn't find
> anything in the archives. For a long time already I've been thinking
> about possibly adding a new syntax for array(...) which would be
> shorter. I'd suggest [...]. While I am usu
On 2/4/07, Ilia Alshanetsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4-Feb-07, at 1:14 PM, Pierre wrote:
> On 2/4/07, Ilia Alshanetsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I personally find array extremely clear, in recent weeks I had to do
>> A LOT of JavaScript work where the array syntax works in a manner you
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> Yes, you will come across it if its added.
> I find the Javascript syntax confusing to read as well. However more
> importantly I do not see the point in adding this sugar to save 5 chars.
Nested arrays become very unreadable with the current PHP syntax. I
think killing
Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
On 4-Feb-07, at 1:14 PM, Pierre wrote:
On 2/4/07, Ilia Alshanetsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I personally find array extremely clear, in recent weeks I had to do
A LOT of JavaScript work where the array syntax works in a manner you
suggest for PHP and its a massive pai
On 4-Feb-07, at 1:14 PM, Pierre wrote:
On 2/4/07, Ilia Alshanetsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I personally find array extremely clear, in recent weeks I had to do
A LOT of JavaScript work where the array syntax works in a manner you
suggest for PHP and its a massive pain. It does not make for a
Pierre wrote:
> On 2/4/07, Ilia Alshanetsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I personally find array extremely clear, in recent weeks I
> had to do A
> > LOT of JavaScript work where the array syntax works in a manner you
> > suggest for PHP and its a massive pain. It does not make for a very
> >
Steph wrote:
On 2/4/07, Ilia Alshanetsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I personally find array extremely clear, in recent weeks I had to do
A LOT of JavaScript work where the array syntax works in a manner you
suggest for PHP and its a massive pain. It does not make for a very
clear code. I think t
On 2/4/07, Ilia Alshanetsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I personally find array extremely clear, in recent weeks I had to do
A LOT of JavaScript work where the array syntax works in a manner you
suggest for PHP and its a massive pain. It does not make for a very
clear code. I think the syntax you
ay 1.
Andi
-Original Message-
From: Ilia Alshanetsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 9:28 AM
To: Andi Gutmans
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Syntactic improvement to array
I have to second Marcus on this, this new syntax makes things
harder to re
Hi,
On 2/4/07, Ilia Alshanetsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I personally find array extremely clear, in recent weeks I had to do
A LOT of JavaScript work where the array syntax works in a manner you
suggest for PHP and its a massive pain. It does not make for a very
clear code. I think the syntax
ould have used from day 1.
Andi
-Original Message-
From: Ilia Alshanetsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 9:28 AM
To: Andi Gutmans
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Syntactic improvement to array
I have to second Marcus on this, this new synt
Ilia Alshanetsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 9:28 AM
> To: Andi Gutmans
> Cc: internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Syntactic improvement to array
>
> I have to second Marcus on this, this new syntax makes things
> harder to read. I me
I have to second Marcus on this, this new syntax makes things harder
to read. I mean what are you saving here, a few letter?
Ilia
On 4-Feb-07, at 2:25 AM, Andi Gutmans wrote:
Hi,
I thought I may have brought this up a long time ago but couldn't
find anything in the archives.
For a long t
My 2c - unless we also make it behave like a list() when in
assignment context - I think it will confusing.
So I'm +1 if we make it work as both list() and array(), and -1 otherwise.
Zeev
At 09:25 04-02-07, Andi Gutmans wrote:
Hi,
I thought I may have brought this up a long time ago but coul
Marcus Boerger wrote:
> it is a bit harder to read and not the php way imo.
The PHP way is to steal and borrow from other languages whenever
possible to produce a syntax that is clear and understandable to people
doing web development.
What is clear and understandable to web developers is a mov
Marcus Boerger wrote:
Hello Andi,
it is a bit harder to read and not the php way imo.
I agree with Marcus.
regards,
Lukas
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Yep. I should have finished reading my messages first :)
> -Original Message-
> From: Pierre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 7:24 AM
> To: Hannes Magnusson
> Cc: Andi Gutmans; internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Syntactic im
di
> -Original Message-
> From: Hannes Magnusson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 6:30 AM
> To: Andi Gutmans
> Cc: internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Syntactic improvement to array
>
> Hi Andi
>
> function typeHinted([
On 2/4/07, Hannes Magnusson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Andi
function typeHinted([] $array = []) { // type hint array, default to empty one
That's a wrong example.
Type hinting should still rely on the literal name:
function typeHinted(Array $myarray=[])
--Pierre
--
PHP Internals - PHP R
Hannes Magnusson wrote:
typeHinted([1 => [1 => []]]); // array(1 => array(1 => array()));
IMHO the common case would benefit and your pathological example is
unreadable both ways. Personally I'd reformat it to
typeHinted([
1 => [
1 => []
]
]);
resp.
typeHint
Hi Andi
function typeHinted([] $array = []) { // type hint array, default to empty one
if(count($array)) {
array_merge($array, ["foo" => []]); // merge $array with
array("foo" => array());
return $array;
}
return []; // empty array
}
typeHinted([1 => [1 => []]]); // array(
On 2/4/07, Nico Haase <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hallöchen,
*Johannes Schlüter* schrub:
> - Without keyword it's hard to find the documentation if you don't know
>that syntax
Well, this is the same with HEREDOC since you can use any delimiter.
http://php.net/<<<
-Hannes
And this new ar
Hallöchen,
*Johannes Schlüter* schrub:
> - Without keyword it's hard to find the documentation if you don't know
>that syntax
Well, this is the same with HEREDOC since you can use any delimiter.
And this new array-syntax should not replace the old one, but extend
it, so everyone who wants to
Hi Andi,
I'd like such a syntax enhancement.
These should be the results from the last time the issue was discussed:
http://devzone.zend.com/node/view/id/1474#Heading7
If I remember correct the main issues stated against it were
- it's to perlish
- Without keyword it's hard to find the documen
I like it :)
+1
Edin
On Feb 4, 2007, at 8:25, Andi Gutmans wrote:
Hi,
I thought I may have brought this up a long time ago but couldn't find
anything in the archives.
For a long time already I've been thinking about possibly adding a new
syntax for array(...) which would be shorter. I'd sug
Hi Andi,
On 2/4/07, Andi Gutmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I thought I may have brought this up a long time ago but couldn't find anything
in the archives.
For a long time already I've been thinking about possibly adding a new syntax
for array(...) which would be shorter. I'd suggest
[..
I think it's not worth doing unless there's overwhelming support as it's not
desperately needed. But I'd be interested to hear
people's thoughts. It seems implementation shouldn't be an issue but I'd have
to dive a bit deeper.
it sure acceptable for php users and will never be a conflict to "ph
Hello Andi,
it is a bit harder to read and not the php way imo.
best regards
marcus
Sunday, February 4, 2007, 8:25:22 AM, you wrote:
> Hi,
> I thought I may have brought this up a long time ago but couldn't find
> anything in the archives.
> For a long time already I've been thinking about
78 matches
Mail list logo
