On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 12:39 AM Peter Kokot <peterko...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you for such a detailed response. Ok, I understand then. Then > next logical step here is - I would maybe want to use these awesome > short tags also then. No disrespect Peter, but I really don't think you understand (my position). I don't think there's anything awesome about short tags. I don't think there's anything evil about them either. They are what they are, what they have been for the last two decades. They didn't cause any damage to PHP, and they won't start causing damage to PHP in the future. Personally, I like the verbose version a lot more, I like the verbosity. I'm capable of holding that preference in my mind alongside realizing that others have a different preference. I'm not missionary about my tag preferences, and neither should you. So, why not enabling these short tags everywhere then and suggesting > in the PHP manual that they can be used again in PHP x.y version etc? > As much as it's an uncommon use case - I think making PHP inherently incompatible with XML is not a good idea. As I mentioned, personally I also prefer the verbosity as well as the free PHP publicity in every tag. But a more fundamental level, I really fail to see any good reason to be spending our brain cycles on this matter (yes, I realize that we're waaay too late, but better late than never). This is a non-issue, that we suddenly made into an issue, and now we need to discuss it, come up with pros and cons, debate them, write lengthy proposals and counterarguments - and for what? For dealing with a non-issue. Can we turn this issue back into the non-issue that it is? Zeev
