As discussed, these were my comments on PSR-12. I don't recall seeing any movement on addressing them.
The full review thread with comments from others is at: https://groups.google.com/forum/?#!msg/php-fig/vZOpga3xoLg/7gdNxNlVCQAJ --Larry Garfield ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: [PSR-12] Review phase review Date: Sunday, December 10, 2017, 3:00:40 PM CST From: Larry Garfield <la...@garfieldtech.com> To: php-fig@googlegroups.com *Puts on CC member hat* 4.2: * Regarding trait whitespacing, it feels incomplete. Like, class bodies should get the same "set of blocks with one line separating them" treatment as the file header does. That would effectively expand to one line between methods, and between the properties, too. I don't know if that's scope creep but as is it feels lacking and incomplete. * Related: Technically I see nothing that mandates properties-first, then methods. That's virtually universal from what I've seen, though. Should that be included in class organization? 4.5: * I still hold that "function foo(): string" is silly and the colon should have spaces on either side. This feels like an entirely unnecessary inconsistency. 8: * I know it's unresolvable without breaking the most controversial part of PSR-2, but I am just going to call out the inconsistency in anonymous classes between closures and explicit classes. That's messy. Metadoc: 2: * "PHP-FIG" is usually hyphenated, although Secretaries, please decide on which the proper spelling is. :-) * "we have taken a more prescriptive approach and defined the standards for new language features as they are released" - eh, I know that was the intent, but is that still true, given how long PSR-12 has been in progress? * " it will have a better chance of being adopted but this is in the hope that it will mean that projects." - That sentence is grammatically incomprehensible and ends in the middle so I have no idea what it's saying. 3.1: * PHP 7.1 and 7.2 should be mentioned, since there is mention of 7.1 syntax. (I don't know that 7.2 has any new syntax we should care about.) 4.4: * The description here of the vote, IIRC, is rather misleading. It wasn't a "do you like this", but a "do you have a really really good reason to not do it the way we've already written?" That's why the votes are so dramatically biased in favor of the status quo: The survey specifically said to bias that direction. The survey should be accurately described or omitted. As is, it is misleading and false. 4.5: * Typo, there's an extra ] in the text. 6: * No need to bold names. I don't think any other specs do. 7: * Formatting error on "Entrance Vote". Generally: * notice there's no mention of variadics. Was that deliberate? If the goal is to cover "language features that didn't exist in 5.3 when PSR-2 was written", variadics and the splat operator (which is still the coolest named operator ever) seem like something that should be covered. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ php-fig/4025631.r995PC85BO%40vulcan. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. ----------------------------------------- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/2699248.CHVaSoMOqi%40vulcan. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
