Hi,
On Do, 2019-04-11 at 15:32 -0500, Michael Morris wrote:
> Submitted to the floor is a Wired article from 2 days ago I came
> across
>
> https://www.wired.com/story/coding-is-for-everyoneas-long-as-you-spea
> k-english/
>
Oh, memories. Microsoft Office has (or had) localised macros. This lea
On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 1:10 AM Derick Rethans wrote:
>
> My favourite annoyance is using a non breaking space in
> function/method names ;-)
"Better" yet, you can use characters that are different, but look the
same as Latin chars
e.g. CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER ES (U+0441) instead of (LATIN SMALL LE
On Thu, 11 Apr 2019, Walter Parker wrote:
> I also am old enough to have used/remember using BASIC. I remember German
> and Japanese friends that wrote in BASIC. It was interesting to see German
> programs where all the keywords were in English and all the text was in
> German. The Japanese was ev
I also am old enough to have used/remember using BASIC. I remember German
and Japanese friends that wrote in BASIC. It was interesting to see German
programs where all the keywords were in English and all the text was in
German. The Japanese was even more strange as the system had to switch
between
On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 12:17 AM Benjamin Morel
wrote:
> This may be harder for people having a native language with a different
> alphabet, though.
>
That's unlikely to be a problem. Even to get to the PHP manual you have to
type `www.php.net` (or `google.com` if you want to google something),
Hi!
> I'll stop there cause I know there are problems I haven't thought of. And
> I'm not going to argue the syntax I just kicked out from the top of my head
> is the best either.
For better or for worse, English is the lingua franca of the internet
technology. You can, of course, create a compil
The problem with this approach is that while it may become more readable
for the native speaker, it becomes pretty much impossible to read for the
rest of the world.
Having one single syntax for everyone allows all programmers in the world
to share code. I can't imagine a world where I'd find a lib
Submitted to the floor is a Wired article from 2 days ago I came across
https://www.wired.com/story/coding-is-for-everyoneas-long-as-you-speak-english/
The manual of PHP is translated into multiple languages - but what are the
development hurdles of the language itself being multilingual?
>From
> From: Robert Korulczyk [mailto:rob...@korulczyk.pl]
>
> Personally, I'm surprised by the controversy around this change. So far it
> was an
> obvious anti-pattern for me, and never seen anybody who was aware of the
> consequences of using http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 1:48 PM M. W. Moe wrote:
>
> @Benjamin Morel
>
> you must certainly have basic comprehension troubles; read me back; it is
> public; keep for yourself your
> emotional false projections to myself and infantile behaviors to yourself;
> I would never dare simply by following
@Benjamin Morel
you must certainly have basic comprehension troubles; read me back; it is
public; keep for yourself your
emotional false projections to myself and infantile behaviors to yourself;
I would never dare simply by following
the basic rules of education; maybe english grammar should intr
@Robert Hickman
yes somehow that's a valid conclusion; however, I can walk and talk; it
does not
bother me at all; I like distractions.
You have a nice day.
On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 9:38 AM Robert Hickman
wrote:
> @M. W. Moe If you don't like the java-isms you can ignore them to a
> large exten
> Turning it on permanently would also solve the problem
Well, yes, although it creates "another way of doing the same thing". So far
PHP was on a way to remove redundant tags. Permanently enabling of short
open tags looks like a move in the opposite direction.
Personally, I'm surprised by the
@M. W. Moe If you don't like the java-isms you can ignore them to a
large extent, which I do. However in doing so you're going against the
grain and will end up writing a lot of stuff yourself. I do find it
weird how PHP has morphed so drastically from it's origins and also
wander why. If people wa
> why? if voicing reasonable criticisms is bothering you; then you should
do something else in life;
> because engineering is built on this `very` concept;
You're very welcome to challenge the "java impurities" that have been a
foundation of the language for 15 years—although you may better invest
@Fabien S
yes, I think you could remove decoration; but still lambda capture process
must
be clarified i.e iterating your ruleset; you don't want to capture every
scope variables.
On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 8:22 AM Fabien S wrote:
> Thanks a lot for all your efforts Nikita.
>
> I really like the
On 4/11/2019 1:12 AM, Robert Korulczyk wrote:
Sorry for the sarcasm, please don't consider this as a personal attack. The
whole community (not just you) considers short open tags poison because not
XML-compatible...
This is rather removing another trap from the language. As long as short open
Thanks a lot for all your efforts Nikita.
I really like the Haskell `\($x)` syntax, could someone confirm if it would
possible to drop the parenthesis (like `\$x`) if we have one argument ?
Thanks in advance, regards
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit:
@Benjamin Morel
why? if voicing reasonable criticisms is bothering you; then you should do
something else in life;
because engineering is built on this `very` concept; I am not in the apex
or any emotional trend;
it does not interest me.
You have a good day!
On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 7:58 AM Benj
> yes php still suffers of
> it's java-like-transform; historically named php5;
> repeating the same design traps almost 20 years after it;
Maybe you could just switch to another language then, and bother another
mailing list?
On Thu, 11 Apr 2019 at 16:51, M. W. Moe wrote:
> @Stephen Reay
>
>
@Stephen Reay
i) Good for you!, if you say so must be the truth; yes php still suffers of
it's java-like-transform; historically named php5;
repeating the same design traps almost 20 years after it; and in the
real-life the most interesting inquiries about the language evolution are
blocked by thi
On 02.04.2019 at 11:42, Nicolai Scheer wrote:
> I'm currently in the process of migrating an old application from php 5.6
> to 7.2.
> In the process, I fiddled with the default_charset ini setting.
>
> The documentation states (c.f.
> https://www.php.net/manual/en/ini.core.php#ini.default-charset)
On 11/04/2019 08:52, Guilliam Xavier wrote:
Honestly as a newbie here I'm feeling more tired than I had expected
and I'm not sure if we'll find a syntax+semantics pair that will reach
a consensus... Suggestions and comments very welcome!
Don't stress yourself about it. At the end of the day we'
On Thu, 11 Apr 2019 at 12:14, Peter Cowburn wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 at 11:44, G. P. B. wrote:
>
>> Hello Internals,
>>
>> As there have been no further comments the voting for my RFC [1] to
>> deprecate PHP's
>> short open tags has started and will run for two (2) weeks.
>>
>
> Firstly,
On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 at 11:44, G. P. B. wrote:
> Hello Internals,
>
> As there have been no further comments the voting for my RFC [1] to
> deprecate PHP's
> short open tags has started and will run for two (2) weeks.
>
Firstly, I apologize for not mentioning this before the vote was opened.
Doe
> On 11 Apr 2019, at 04:49, Wes wrote:
>
> The
> whole community (not just you) considers short open tags poison because not
> XML-compatible... while they use stuff like twig, which is also not
> XML-compatible.
I can’t say I’ve run into the XML issue in a real environment, but IMO the big
‘
On Thu, 11 Apr 2019 at 00:43, Rowan Collins wrote:
>
> On 10 April 2019 21:56:41 BST, "Björn Larsson"
> wrote:
> >Could then the \($x) syntax be a good compromise between
> >readability & implementation?
>
This syntax does make sense to me, although only as I've seen it
before in Haskell, which
Am 09.04.2019 um 10:25 schrieb Nikita Popov:
A small cleanup RFC for PHP 8: https://wik
+1
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
> Sorry for the sarcasm, please don't consider this as a personal attack. The
> whole community (not just you) considers short open tags poison because not
> XML-compatible...
This is rather removing another trap from the language. As long as short open
tags exist and depend on INI directive, th
OK, I'll try to sum up a bit the recent messages (since Nikita's one):
Mark Randall wrote:
> As is implied from the name, an implicit cast is done because the code
> needs it to, not because it has been told to by the caller. It is
> natural to be more conservative when doing something that has no
30 matches
Mail list logo
