On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 at 11:20, Benjamin Eberlei <kont...@beberlei.de> wrote:
> 1. The token name has historic value and should be preserved as such I don't think it has historic value. It might have nostalgic value but nostalgia for: > I think everyone hits it once or twice, has the "wtf?" moment, googles, and > never forgets it again - even if they can't pronounce it... is not a great piece of nostalgia. But regardless of the past value, it's the current and future trade-offs we should be considering. i.e. is the cost of changing it bigger or smaller than the benefit of not having a token name that can only be reasoned about after googling. I haven't seen anyone say any cost for changing it. Even if the work is done to improve the error messages, avoiding having a token that you can't grok the meaning from the name of it, is a small improvement. So the tradeoff appears to be very small or zero cost, versus a benefit for everyone who hasn't already stumbled into it as a blocker for their understanding of internals. cheers Dan Ack -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
