At 12:14 PM 11/16/2001 +0100, Marc Boeren wrote: > > > > It's odd and inconsistent to have <%=, <?=, but not <?php=. > > >I was also against <?= originally, but now that we do have it I agree > > >that consistency (symmetry?) is better. > >Let's take this one step further (into absurdity ;-) and also add > ><script language="php">= %var; </script> > >just for consistency, of course :)
Blah. This will *never* be supported and I don't think it makes sense to include this in the discussion about <?=, ,<%= and <?php= > > Now all that is left is to decide :) I think we're at a deadlock. > > Who opposes this strongly? > >Not me, I use <?php all the time... It seems that most people support <?php=. If no one comes up with a convincing argument against I will add <?php= later on today. BTW, I never liked the <?= syntax and opposed it at the time but I think today because many people seem to like it, it makes sense to have <?php= for consistency sake. Andi -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
