Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Default expression

[Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]]

On 25 August 2024 22:51:45 BST, Bilge <bi...@scriptfusion.com> wrote:
>Great! I'm glad we're finally getting to this, because I think this is what 
>you, and everyone advocating for a restricted grammar, is actually missing. 
>You think you've caught me in some kind of "gotcha" moment, but fair warning, 
>I'm about to play my Uno Reverse card.

You could have got to it much quicker by just saying it earlier, particularly 
when explaining how the current implementation is *not* the easy path.

I was not in the slightest thinking I'd caught any kind of "gotcha", I was 
repeating something I'd already said multiple times, that the *behaviour* I 
feel is justified is having "default" usable in the RHS of a ternary or 
coalesce.

I'm not an expert on parsers, and never claimed to be, so it's not particularly 
surprising to me that I've overlooked a reason why "expr ?: default" can't be 
included without also including "default ?: expr", and will just have to take 
your word for it.

It doesn't, unfortunately, persuade me that the behaviour proposed is sensible.

Rowan Tommins
[IMSoP]