On Tue, Mar 31, 2020, at 6:01 PM, Jakob Givoni wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 10:42 AM Larry Garfield
> wrote:
> >
> > I really like that you're including a poll for the no-votes. Thank you for
> > that. However, as is they're all running together and making it hard to
> > tell where one en
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 10:42 AM Larry Garfield wrote:
>
> I really like that you're including a poll for the no-votes. Thank you for
> that. However, as is they're all running together and making it hard to tell
> where one ends and another begins. Is there a way to separate out the tables
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 12:51 PM Ilija Tovilo wrote:
>
> Hi internals
>
> A few days ago I opened the discussion on the switch expression RFC:
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/switch_expression
>
> There's been a fundamental disagreement on what the switch expression
> should actually be. Due to the con
In relation to "Some people have asked why we don't reuse the syntax of the
switch statement". I do not think that it could cause a conflict with an
array. The same is valid for anonymous functions or classes: you need use
terminator (";"). I still prefer it than create another format to switch.
An
Hi internals
A few days ago I opened the discussion on the switch expression RFC:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/switch_expression
There's been a fundamental disagreement on what the switch expression
should actually be. Due to the conflicting feedback I no longer know
how to proceed. This is why I've
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020, at 6:49 AM, Jakob Givoni wrote:
> Heads up!
>
> I've moved the RFC to the voting phase:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/compact-object-property-assignment
>
> Voting is open until the end of Monday, April 13 (your time zone :-).
>
> Good night,
> Jakob
I really like that you
Hi Sara!
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 9:07 AM Sara Golemon wrote:
>
> On the third vote (which syntax would be better), I didn't vote because my
> answer is "None of the above". They're all kind of awful. I'm not against
> the concept of COPA, but every option on there makes me search for the "Nope
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 6:49 AM Jakob Givoni wrote:
> I've moved the RFC to the voting phase:
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/compact-object-property-assignment
>
> On the third vote (which syntax would be better), I didn't vote because my
answer is "None of the above". They're all kind of awful. I'm
Heads up!
I've moved the RFC to the voting phase:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/compact-object-property-assignment
Voting is open until the end of Monday, April 13 (your time zone :-).
Good night,
Jakob
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.n
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 6:45 AM Lester Caine wrote:
>
> The problem Jakob is that the new message is STILL attached to the
> original discussion. If you simply changed the 'DISCUSSION' to 'VOTE'
> then your email client still had the original message links in place.
> The whole email process is so
On 31/03/2020 12:36, Jakob Givoni wrote:
I don't understand why people are replying to this email that has
[VOTE] in the subject as if it's still the discussion thread.
Please let me know if there's something I can do about it.
The problem Jakob is that the new message is STILL attached to the
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 9:23 PM Jakob Givoni wrote:
>
> Heads up!
>
> I've moved the RFC to the voting phase:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/compact-object-property-assignment
>
> Voting is open until the end of Monday, April 13 (your time zone :-).
>
> Good night,
> Jakob
Hi guys,
I don't underst
Hi Dan,
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 9:50 PM Dan Ackroyd wrote:
>
> Please don't forget to send a separate email announcing the voting
> with a separate subject.
This email already has a separate subject, right? Something else missing?
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsu
Hi Jakob,
On Tue, 31 Mar 2020 at 02:58, Jakob Givoni wrote:
> - Will COPA pollute the symbol/syntax space? Very little
> - Does COPA have any implications for future language evolution? None
> that have been shown so far
>
COPA is by its nature a brand new syntax, and that does have implication
Dear Internals,
I've just closed the vote: The RFC is declined with 23 votes in favour and
23 against.
Regards:
Máté
Hi,
> In this case, the problem with COPA as proposed is that it only works for
> public properties that are assigned literally. That is, in my experience,
> a very rare case.
>
> You see, here's the funny thing: It's rare because it's a hassle!
> *MY* experience (I do have some 20 years' worth o
16 matches
Mail list logo
