[ Please CC me on replies, I am only on php-dev ... or should the be on dev, not doc? ]
php-lang is dead then I take it? Or was this just overlooked? -James ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 11:49:51 -0400 (EDT) From: James E. Flemer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: PHP Documentation List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: php-lang On Sat, 11 May 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Sat, 11 May 2002, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: > > [...] > > > IMHO, we need someone who documents language design.... > > Actually, we need someone to finish this: > > http://cvs.php.net/cvs.php/php-lang > > regards, > Derick [ Please CC me on replies, I am only on php-dev ... or should the be on dev, not doc? ] I just took a look at this. I hadn't realized it existed, and am glad it does. For me, reading the lang spec is typically faster and easier than reading docs. I noticed something about the spec that is different from the language though. The following is valid code: if ($bool): endif; True, its pointless code, but it parses and the lang spec should reflect that. However (rev 1.8) of the spec says: statement-list: statement statement-list statement and as far as I can tell, none of the production rules for <statement> can be empty. The closet one is expression statement which can be just ";", but as you can see there is no ";" in the <statement-list> for the <if-statement> production above. The <statement-list> production should be changed to: statement-list: /* empty */ statement-list statement (or similar). Perhaps we could just generate a simple syntax verifier from the rules using (f)lex, then we would quickly be able to check cases like this. -James -- PHP Documentation Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
