On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Rasmus <ras...@lerdorf.com> wrote:
> On 05/31/2011 05:42 PM, dukeofgaming wrote:
>
> > I'm afraid that if ":" is associated with the JSON interop argument and
> the
> > later is discarded then ":" will be discarded too, much like what
> happened
> > with the echo shortcut ("<?=") and the short tags ("<?"). Perhaps the
> idea
> > of JSON interop could be taken to another RFC and get less noise and
> better
> > ideas as a separate topic.
>
> <?= has been decoupled from short tags in 5.4 and is always available.
>
> -Rasmus
>
Yep, I know, and thank you very much for that (I did see your commit a
couple of hours after you posted it). I think there was a lot of confusion
and fear (myself included) when "<?" were deprecated, e.g. the Kohana
project used to have them and recommend them too, but they removed the
practice later and stopped recommending them.
Anyhow, I think ":" vs "=>" is the only thing left to decide on this
proposal. I was thinking that if ":" was to be introduced, perhaps
"array('a':'A',...)" should also be added for consistency, and that is extra
work. In my opinion adopting ":" would be nice, but it would also be noise
for the developer community, perhaps good noise but noise nonetheless.
The healthy thing to do here IMHO, would be putting introduction of ":" as a
separate RFC, perhaps part of a JSON interoperability RFC, but as Adam just
replied, PHP is not JSON and "=>" is a very fundamental thing to change, so
I have mixed feelings about this.
Also, can we agree on the topic of introducing "{ }" for objects to the
proposal?.
Best regards,
David
