On 2010.10.21. 12:56, Richard Quadling wrote:
On 21 October 2010 11:45, Ionut G. Stan<ionut.g.s...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 21/Oct/10 1:17 PM, Richard Quadling wrote:
On 21 October 2010 08:52, Ionut G. Stan<ionut.g.s...@gmail.com> wrote:
Option 5: Implement named parameters?
Come on, play fair. I know all about the named parameters and I didn't
mention them.
Where's the unfairness? I proposed them because the issue you raised is a
perfectly valid reason to introduce named parameters. IMO.
Because for the last few days, named parameters have been discussed.
Again. And with the same result. Not yet (and maybe not ever) for PHP.
This wasn't a real discussion. Most of the contra-replies were of the
"RTFM and no" kind.
The last reference (
www.php.net/~derick/meeting-notes.html#named-parameters ) doesn't
explain either. (It just says it'd violate PHP's KISS principle. But
function calls with a ton of NULLs or array parsing isn't exactly simple
either.)
Although, there aren't any RFCs for the feature, so maybe you're right,
there's nothing to discuss.
Pas
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
