Hi,

I'm that somebody Tyrael is talking about. FTR, I'm all for deprecating
short tags, but I do feel the echo shortcut is a separate issue. Perhaps if
<?php= was implemented a greater deal of people on both sides of the
discussion would be happier.

Best regards,

David

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Ferenc Kovacs <tyr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Philip Olson <phi...@roshambo.org> wrote:
>
> > PLEASE, let the dead horse be!
> >>>>
> >>>
> >> Apparently, this horse is not as dead as some would like it to be :)
> >>
> >
> > The horse is not dead or if so then no proper burial service was given.
> > People are still waiting for the invitations and wanting to hear the
> eulogy.
> >
> > So, instead I'll make the following assumptions and engrave them into
> this
> > topics tombstone:
> >
> >  - short_open_tag is fully alive
> >  - short_open_tag is PHP_INI_SYSTEM|PHP_INI_PERDIR
> >  - all distributed php.ini files disable it (5.3+)
> >  - the default will be enabled, forever, unless #5 is used
> >  - --disable-short-tags will exist, forever
> >  - no new alternative syntax will be implemented, ever
> >
> > That's the situation people should understand and since this horse is
> > considered dead I will:
> >
> >  - update php.ini ini descriptions to reflect this
> >  - update documentation to reflect this
> >  - mark http://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortags as declined
> >  - point to the declined rfc when people suggest these alternatives
> >
> > All discussion is over unless a human knows the above synopsis is false,
> > because CVS has spoken. RIP.
> >
> >
> apparently somebody else brought up the shortag(specifically the <?= tag)
> topic again, and I've noticed that you moved the rfc from declined to "In
> discussion" recently (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortags?do=revisions), so
> I
> would like to know that are these rules still hold, or did something
> happened since this decision?
> I couldn't find the suggested clarification in the docs either (maybe
> looked
> at the wrong place)
>
> Tyrael
>

Reply via email to