@Michael : I'm not sure to understand what you mean. The "&=" operator does a bitwise AND. But if it was an assignment-by-reference operator, maybe an assignment-by-cloning operator would have seemed a good idea?
Some people write code using "=&" like a dedicated operator. For example: $i = 3; $j =& $i; (yes, I know they should write "$j = &$i;") It would be an "inverted equivalent" if we were able to write : $i = new Int(3); $j := $i; 2012/6/30 Michael Morris <dmgx.mich...@gmail.com> > Uhm... &= > > On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Paul Dragoonis <dragoo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > My input is that we should be focusing on features that PHP lacks, or > > fixing bugs rather than adding more sugar syntax just for the sake of > > adding it. > > > > On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 7:47 PM, Pierrick Charron <pierr...@webstart.fr > >wrote: > > > >> No problem when you'll come in Montreal ! If you need any help don't > >> hesitate. > >> > >> Pierrick > >> > >> On 29 June 2012 14:27, Amaury Bouchard <ama...@amaury.net> wrote: > >> > >> > Yes, guys. I totally understand your point. As I said, I had this > idea in > >> > a dreamed context (good or bad dream? I don't know). > >> > But still, I think it's intellectually interesting, even if it's not a > >> > good concept for PHP. :-) > >> > > >> > Pierrick, I owe you a beer ;-) > >> > Le 29 juin 2012 19:06, "Pierrick Charron" <pierr...@webstart.fr> a > >> écrit : > >> > > >> > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >
