On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 6:48 PM Christoph M. Becker
wrote:
> On 24.04.2019 at 19:25, Sara Golemon wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 3:56 AM Nikita Popov
> wrote:
> >
> >> 20 years of code in the wild has not "accepted that fact and moved on".
> If
> >> a left-associative ternary is used, it
On 24.04.2019 at 19:25, Sara Golemon wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 3:56 AM Nikita Popov wrote:
>
>> 20 years of code in the wild has not "accepted that fact and moved on". If
>> a left-associative ternary is used, it is almost certainly a bug. If people
>> use this structure by accident
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 1:56 PM M. W. Moe wrote:
> until this RCF does not happen; I would say nothing interesting will ever
> happen.
>
> Please, Reality TV is less hyperbolic than that.
JIT isn't interesting?
Typed Properties isn't interesting?
FFI isn't interesting?
Preload isn't
Hello,
the underlaying discussion here is more important; than just voting yes or
no on uncompleted hamiltonian graphs; the real question here does php8 will
be a break thru; meaning bugger off the mistakes of the past or a
continuation of them; until this RCF does not happen; I would say nothing
On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 3:56 AM Nikita Popov wrote:
> Can't say I understand your position here. Don't want to change the
> ternary from left-associative to right-associative? I can understand that:
> Silent behavior changes are always problematic. This is not what the RFC
> proposes though.
>
>
> Le 24 avr. 2019 à 11:10, Björn Larsson a écrit :
>
> Den 2019-04-22 kl. 10:09, skrev Nikita Popov:
>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 11:54 AM Nikita Popov wrote:
>>
>>> Hi internals,
>>> The only objection here came from Gabriel, and I don't think we'll come to
>>> an agreement.
>>> Inspired by
On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 5:28 PM Sara Golemon wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 4:54 AM Nikita Popov wrote:
>
>> Inspired by Bob's recent RFC for concat precedence, I'd like to propose a
>> deprecation and removal of the left-associative behavior of ternaries.
>> Instead, explicit parentheses
Hi!
> It'd be swell if PHP's ternary matched other languages, but it doesn't, and
> we have 20 years of code in the wild which has accepted that fact and moved
> on. I don't see the benefit in breaking that code. Advise the use of
> parentheses and move on.
Exactly.
--
Stas Malyshev
On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 4:54 AM Nikita Popov wrote:
> Inspired by Bob's recent RFC for concat precedence, I'd like to propose a
> deprecation and removal of the left-associative behavior of ternaries.
> Instead, explicit parentheses should be used:
>
>
On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 12:12 AM Lauri Kenttä
wrote:
> On 2019-04-09 12:54, Nikita Popov wrote:
> > Inspired by Bob's recent RFC for concat precedence, I'd like to propose
> > a
> > deprecation and removal of the left-associative behavior of ternaries.
> > Instead, explicit parentheses should be
On 2019-04-09 12:54, Nikita Popov wrote:
Inspired by Bob's recent RFC for concat precedence, I'd like to propose
a
deprecation and removal of the left-associative behavior of ternaries.
Instead, explicit parentheses should be used: ...
What about nesting in the middle part: 1 ? 2 ? 3 : 4 : 5
Den 2019-04-09 kl. 11:54, skrev Nikita Popov:
Hi internals,
Inspired by Bob's recent RFC for concat precedence, I'd like to propose a
deprecation and removal of the left-associative behavior of ternaries.
Instead, explicit parentheses should be used:
> Le 10 avr. 2019 à 21:21, Stanislav Malyshev a écrit :
>
> Hi!
>
>> Inspired by Bob's recent RFC for concat precedence, I'd like to propose a
>> deprecation and removal of the left-associative behavior of ternaries.
>> Instead, explicit parentheses should be used:
>>
>>
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 1:22 PM Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> > Inspired by Bob's recent RFC for concat precedence, I'd like to propose a
> > deprecation and removal of the left-associative behavior of ternaries.
> > Instead, explicit parentheses should be used:
> >
> >
Nikita Popov schrieb am Di., 9. Apr. 2019, 11:54:
> Hi internals,
>
> Inspired by Bob's recent RFC for concat precedence, I'd like to propose a
> deprecation and removal of the left-associative behavior of ternaries.
> Instead, explicit parentheses should be used:
>
>
Hi!
> Inspired by Bob's recent RFC for concat precedence, I'd like to propose a
> deprecation and removal of the left-associative behavior of ternaries.
> Instead, explicit parentheses should be used:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/ternary_associativity
Please, let's not mess with language syntax
On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 at 11:19, Bishop Bettini wrote:
> See also Bug 61915[1], which suggests leaving ? left and introducing ?? for
> right. Personally I don't see any benefit to keeping a ternary with left
> associativity.
>
?? wouldn't work, because that's now the null-coalescing operator.
Hello, I am interested to know if this affects behaviour of following code:
putenv($this->colSize ? 'COLUMNS' : 'COLUMNS='.$this->colSize);
> On 9. Apr 2019, at 11:54, Nikita Popov wrote:
>
> Hi internals,
>
> Inspired by Bob's recent RFC for concat precedence, I'd like to propose a
>
On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 at 10:54, Nikita Popov wrote:
> Hi internals,
>
> Inspired by Bob's recent RFC for concat precedence, I'd like to propose a
> deprecation and removal of the left-associative behavior of ternaries.
> Instead, explicit parentheses should be used:
>
>
On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 5:54 AM Nikita Popov wrote:
>
> Inspired by Bob's recent RFC for concat precedence, I'd like to propose a
> deprecation and removal of the left-associative behavior of ternaries.
> Instead, explicit parentheses should be used:
>
>
Hi internals,
Inspired by Bob's recent RFC for concat precedence, I'd like to propose a
deprecation and removal of the left-associative behavior of ternaries.
Instead, explicit parentheses should be used:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/ternary_associativity
This RFC makes nested ternaries without
21 matches
Mail list logo
