On 10/9/07, Antony Dovgal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 09.10.2007 06:32, Andrei Zmievski wrote: > > I will use an example: > > > > $foo = substr($bar, 0, 5) . "-" . substr($bar, 5); > > > > or > > > > $foo = $bar[:5] . "-" . $bar[5:]; > > > > I would argue that the second line is hardly more cryptic than the > > first one. > > How come? > It looks like you're reading $bar[':5'], but forgot the quotes. > On the other side, what could be easier than a function call?
operator is definitely easier because it lets us reuse the same syntax for strings and arrays (and people would need to learn one operator instead of 2 functions and 2 different concatenation operators) > > > And if we were concerned that concerned about duplicate > > functionality, we probably wouldn't have SimpleXML and similar things. > > Mistakes done in the past do not mean we should continue to do them in the > future. simplexml is a mistake? :-/ then DOM is, probably, a mistake too… (it can be implemented in userland using SAX functions) I always thought, that simplexml was the reason xml became "fun" in php (and that was the reason which made a lot xml-programmers upgrade to php5) -- Alexey Zakhlestin http://blog.milkfarmsoft.com/
