Hello,
2012/4/9 Ángel González <keis...@gmail.com>:
> On 09/04/12 20:23, Chris Stockton wrote:
>> Hello,
>> Although I am not very interested in this feature, if it is
>> implemented I like the idea of flags instead of introducing new
>> keywords. Maintaining backwards compatibility would be great
>> considering the benefit to the feature to be completely honest (and in
>> disagreement to many people, but I do understand the reasoning for
>> everyone's interest in it) is extremely minor in my eyes.
>>
>> In addition I would suggest maybe using PHP_INCLUDE_* as a place for
>> these constants to live.
>>
>> -Chris
> That would still be a parse error.
> Either
> include "file.php", 5;
> or
> include ("file.php", 42);
>
> Fails with a parse error about unexpected ','
>
> On the other hand, a new keyword can be written in a backwards
> compatible way by making it look like a function call in a non-taken branch:
>
> *if ( version_compare(PHP_VERSION*, '5.5', '<') )
> include_once $file;
> else
> require_code($file, array( 'once'=>true, 'warn' => 'ignore' ) );
>
I am not sure I am following you here Angel, are you confusing
backwards and forward compatibility? I wouldn't expect a feature to
ever work forward compatibly. I.E. Can't use traits in php 4 and can't
play a blu ray disc in a dvd player. The goal here is that if you have
a large code base which has a hand rolled include_code function
already, your change is backwards compatible with that code base. Same
to be said for any constants, which is why I recommended using the
reserved PHP_* space.
-Chris
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
