On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 01:24 +0200, Bob Weinand wrote: > Here is a concrete list when keywords are allowed: > https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/438 > > Then you should have a better idea what exactly will be allowed in future. > > Please go over the list and tell me explicitly what I should revert there.
How would you teach that? > > I'm sure one could construct other such cases. > > > The "where (easily) possible" is exactly _not_ this. To call here the function > while you would have to write namespace\while(); (or call_user_func etc.) > I explicitly tried to not change the things where might be such collisions. > (That's what I meant with the "(easily) possible".) > So this is basically a non-issue, I think, as it is highlighted that it's a > function > and not a language construct by the need to prefix this. This, in my opinion, is a major inconsistency, mess and no-go. > > I'm more open about allowing such identifiers as method names only, as > > those are prefixed in some way ($object-> or someClass:: ) but even > > there I tend to consider the consistency between function and method > > names more important than this flexibility. > > Yes, that is one of the main points. "Method names and properties can be made of keywords" is a rule I can live with, that's teachable, in itself consistent and almost always clearly readable. (exceptions are already unreadable code) I still have doubts about the inconsistency between function and method names then, which is why I'd be on -0.5. > > I couldn't test those examples as your branch for some reason didn't > > work, even though I made sure I regenerated the parser, but I didn't > > look deeper, maybe my fault. > This sounds like some error while you were patching, because I cannot > reproduce any such problem here. as said: could be my fault :) johannes -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
