Good morning Christoph,
I would even bump it to a much more recent version for 8.x or we will
have the same issue during 8.x lifetime (we may anyway but starting
with a 10+ years old version makes it much more likely).
Best,
On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 9:50 PM Christoph M. Becker wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> On Jan 10, 2020, at 1:19 PM, Andreas Hennings wrote:
>
> This would work, but:
> ": $this". With fluent + static I would have to look in two places.
How about :fluent?
This would indicate both a type and a further constraint meaning $this.
Something to consider...?
-Mike
--
PHP Interna
> On Jan 10, 2020, at 2:58 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>
> The first part seems to make sense but I don't think losing "$array[0]"
> does... I get the consistency argument but I feel most people would
> rather have this useful syntax working and not worry about the fact that
> it's theoreticall
On 10/01/2020 17:29, Larry Garfield wrote:
But having some kind of working way to reference a function that doesn't
involve concatenating a string onto a namespace constant would be*super* nice.
Whether it's called ::func or ::nameof I don't much care.
Viz, replace this:
$func = __NAMESPACE
Hi!
> I think there's two ways to address this. One is to deprecate and
> eventually remove the non-wrapped array interpolation syntax entirely,
> requiring people to use the generic "{$array['foobar']}" syntax instead.
> For the sake of consistency, I think this would also include deprecating
> t
On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 at 20:53, Dik Takken wrote:
> On 09-01-2020 17:52, Andreas Hennings wrote:
> > On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 at 16:31, Nikita Popov wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 4:06 PM Rowan Tommins
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> An argument could be made that $this does also specify a certain
> contr
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020, at 6:10 PM, Marcio Almada wrote:
> Em qui., 9 de jan. de 2020 às 20:57, Mike Schinkel
> escreveu:
> >
> > > On Jan 9, 2020, at 6:53 PM, Marcio Almada wrote:
> > >
> > > Because we would be expanding a construct that already looks
> > > inappropriate from a purely
> > > semant
> > I stand by my comment that this has *some* of the same problems as a
> > separate "build" script, such as the need to be configured correctly,
>
> I find repeating of this as overstating the concern simply because any
> programming language feature would need to be used correctly. So this als
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 10:02 PM Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> use Interfaces;
> if(!$object instanceof Interfaces\MyInterface)
> {
> // Notice the ! is right associative and instanceof is non
> associative, hence the lack of parantheses
> }
Sorry for off-topic but that comment is
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 1:05 PM Nikita Popov wrote:
>
> [...] we already support
> "$string" and "$object->prop", so it is in a way natural that
> "$array['key']" is also supported, as the last of the "fundamental"
> variable syntaxes.
What about rather deprecating "$object->prop" too? The cu
10 matches
Mail list logo
