Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] PHP Annotations VS Attributes

On 01/05/16 11:19, Fleshgrinder wrote: >> Both terms have advantages and disadvantages, precedents and >> > connotations - and both have potential ambiguities with other uses of >> > the normal English words that have been borrowed. In the end, it really >> > is mostly a matter of taste. >> > >

[PHP-DEV] Idea for PHP v7.x: Shared Opcode Cache

Hi guys, I am working on and off on my own programming language, but knowing myself well, I know that this is just a hobby project that will never be finished. I have an idea for PHP7 that may or may not be relevant to you guys. I do code in C but I don't have the time to get deeply involved in

Re: [PHP-DEV] Attributes/Annotations Case Study: Drupal

Hi! > It would never occur to me to not have it regenerated on each access. If I want to cache it I will do so myself, thanks. Not sure why would you care. These should be value objects, so they should keep no state and as such it shouldn't matter when they are generated and how many of them. >

Re: [PHP-DEV] Attributes/Annotations Case Study: Drupal

On 04/30/2016 06:21 PM, Rowan Collins wrote: On 30/04/2016 23:45, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: Oh, of course you can have methods, but then it is strange conceptually - you have a normal class, which some other part of the language just uses for something else that classes are not routinely used

[PHP-DEV] [RFC][Accepted] Catching Multiple Exception Types

Hi, The vote on the RFC https://wiki.php.net/rfc/multiple-catch#vote is now closed. The RFC was accepted with 40 "Yes" and 6 "No". I'll merge the patch in the master branch today. Thanks to anybody who contributed to this RFC by voting or giving us feedback. Bronisław and Pierrick

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Pipe Operator

On 01/05/16 15:39, Dan Ackroyd wrote: > Marco wrote: >> > Relevant: https://youtu.be/UvD1VjRvGIk > I could imagine how having inline branches could be a useful thing for > functional programming, for various scenarios, including being able to > 'inline' error handling, to be nearer the source of

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Pipe Operator

Ho Rowan, Le 01/05/2016 01:14, Rowan Collins a écrit : On 29/04/2016 20:58, Sara Golemon wrote: This is one of my favorites out of HackLang. It's pure syntactic sugar, but it goes a long way towards improving readability. https://wiki.php.net/rfc/pipe-operator I like this idea, for the same

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Pipe Operator

On 30 April 2016 at 07:49, Marco Pivetta wrote: > Here's the pseudo-code for a typical request/response dispatch cycle: Hi Marco, Could you clarify something for me? If I submitted a pull-request to you, with variables named like this: $v = buildRequest(); $v =

[PHP-DEV] [RFC] Forbid dynamic calls to scope introspection functions

Hi internals, Per the request of Dmitry and Stas, I'm moving this proposal into an RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/forbid_dynamic_scope_introspection Regards, Nikita

Re: Fwd: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Anonymous Class Lexical Scope

Hi, Nice and clear-cut RFC! One reflection is if the usage of use to "import" variables could have an impact on a proposal for a short form of Lambda functions in the future? Cheers //Björn PS I liked the Short Closure RFC btw. Den 2016-04-26 kl. 10:25, skrev Joe Watkins: Morning internals,

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Pipe Operator

On 01/05/16 00:20, Dan Ackroyd wrote: > Personally, I always use semantically meaningful variable names, as > they make life so much easier for any person who needs to read the > code. AND one can easily see if there are points in the sequence where one does need to handle alternate results. I

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] PHP Annotations VS Attributes

On 4/30/2016 11:52 PM, Rowan Collins wrote: > Just thought I'd point out this contradiction. > > It seems to me that "Data Annotations" are one particular use of a > language feature which is called "attributes". Looking through the list > of descendants of the base Attribute class [1], I can see

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Pipe Operator

Le dimanche 1 mai 2016, 00:20:45 Dan Ackroyd a écrit : > However, it is not the proposed new syntax that makes the code more > readable - it is solely due to writing it in the correct order that > makes the code more readable. This can be done using current PHP > syntax, so that the code is: > >

Re: [PHP-DEV] Forbid dynamic calls to scope introspection/modification functions

I'm all in favour of this. It makes the language much more predictable and amenable to optimisation and static analysis overall, at the cost of what IMO is a very, very minor BC break. To think that all this time, functions I've written which accept a callable could be passed something like