Hi, -1 on this proposal
+1 on named parameters As of for this... > > handy and easier. I could dig the archives but I don't remember what > > was the reason why we rejected the idea back then. > > Bikeshedding about the syntax mostly, but that all pales compared to > amount of work that needs to be done in the engine to support named > params. Unless, of course, I'm completely wrong and there's an easy way > to do it, which I am totally missing - in which case please point it out. Pierrick and I both implemented this support for Annotations back in 2010. Maybe it's worth to look into that patch for some ideas. Regards, On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Marc Bennewitz <dev@mabe.berlin> wrote: > > Am 14.01.2015 um 20:21 schrieb Adam Harvey: > >> On 14 January 2015 at 11:15, Marc Bennewitz <dev@mabe.berlin> wrote: >> >>> But I think adding "default" as new keyword is a big BC break! >>> >> Default already is a keyword: http://php.net/switch. There's no BC break. >> > > OMG you are right - my fault > > > >> I personally also don't like it and asked myself why can't the parameter >>> simply skipped? >>> >> That was in the original proposal, but counting commas is pretty lousy >> if you're skipping more than one or two parameters. Having a keyword >> makes it more readable. >> >> Adam >> >> > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- Guilherme Blanco MSN: guilhermebla...@hotmail.com GTalk: guilhermeblanco Toronto - ON/Canada
