Hi Andi,

We already discussed most of semantic changes introduced in AST patch.
Most of them came from another approved RFC
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/uniform_variable_syntax

Thanks. Dmitry.


On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 6:32 AM, Andi Gutmans <a...@zend.com> wrote:

> Hi Nikita,
>
> I reviewed the AST RFC on my way to vote but there was something that
> wasn’t clear to me.
> This patch introduces some semantic/behavioral changes in addition to the
> AST.
> Are these as a side-effect of how AST was implemented? Or are they
> unrelated to the AST patch?
> I think some of them make sense but I’m having a bit of a hard time
> separating out the benefits of the AST (which I really like) and making
> other changes to semantics w/o really understanding if they are
> side-effects and we have no choice vs. we’re trying to solve for two
> separate items in one RFC.
> Any BC breaks here we think could bite us?
>
> Any insight would be much appreciated.
> Thanks!
> Andi
>
> On Aug 18, 2014, at 9:41 AM, Nikita Popov <nikita....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi internals!
> >
> > I've opened the vote on the Abstract Syntax Tree RFC:
> >
> >    https://wiki.php.net/rfc/abstract_syntax_tree#vote
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nikita
>
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

Reply via email to