On 04/07/2016 07:37 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
Do we really need to make everything so shorthand that one has no idea
what one is looking at when scanning code?
That's the goal right? We're trying to make Perl 7 here.
Just kidding. I like it because it makes the syntax look consistent with
the
On 04/07/2016 07:21 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
Hi everyone,
Bob and I have made an RFC which proposes an alternative syntax for list():
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/short_list_syntax
Please tell us your thoughts.
Thanks!
Mhm, yes, I like it a lot! +1
--
Stephen
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime De
Readonly is already used in the documentation for some things in the DOM
book. Writeonce sounds strange.
Sebastian Bergmann schrieb am Sa., 9. Apr. 2016 15:52:
> Am 09.04.2016 um 12:55 schrieb Niklas Keller:
> > Another possible choice would be "readonly".
>
> Rather "writeonce", no?
>
>
> --
>
Am 09.04.2016 um 12:55 schrieb Niklas Keller:
> Another possible choice would be "readonly".
Rather "writeonce", no?
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Another possible choice would be "readonly".
> On Apr 9, 2016, at 09:39 , Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
>
> Am 05.04.2016 um 11:13 schrieb Marco Pivetta:
>> First of all: +1 to this: very useful for value objects!
>
> My thought exactly.
Big +1 on this feature for the exact same reasons.
>
>> do we want to use `final`, or `immutable` for
Am 07.04.2016 um 14:21 schrieb Andrea Faulds:
> Please tell us your thoughts.
+1
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Am 05.04.2016 um 11:13 schrieb Marco Pivetta:
> First of all: +1 to this: very useful for value objects!
My thought exactly.
> do we want to use `final`, or `immutable` for these properties?
I have the same sentiment you have, that "final" would be confusing
and "immutable" would be better.
