On 2018-02-11 20:41, Wes wrote:
Hello PHPeople, I present to you... the shortest RFC ever.
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/deprecate-backtick-operator
Let me know what you think!
I don't have much of an opinion yet on the issue (observing the
arguments in the discussion so far), but one thing whic
Hi!
> Actually, for me the only valid argument to deprecate the backtick
> operator is "because it is a shady way to execute a rare and dangerous
> operation". I, personally, would make that the main reason for the
> deprecation proposal, and would move the other arguments to the "future
> scope"
On 13.02.2018 at 23:41, Wes wrote:
> Consider that people dislike writing \strlen(), they will for sure dislike
> writing u"string". Hence reassigning backticks to unicode strings seemed to
> me like a possibility.
Okay. However, in my opinion, it is a bad idea to suggest a deprecation
of a feat
On 13 February 2018 22:41:54 GMT+00:00, Wes wrote:
>Consider that people dislike writing \strlen(), they will for sure
>dislike
>writing u"string". Hence reassigning backticks to unicode strings
>seemed to
>me like a possibility.
I think a lot of people would dislike writing all their strings in
Consider that people dislike writing \strlen(), they will for sure dislike
writing u"string". Hence reassigning backticks to unicode strings seemed to
me like a possibility.
On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 3:35 PM, David Rodrigues wrote:
> It too could causes confusion with single-quote in some fonts, sizes and
> styles.
>
> Is more easy to identify shell_exec() than backtick usage, anyway.
>
> It have exactly the same behaviour than shell_exec(). Do not need adapt
> usage be
Aren't those different AST nodes?
On 13 Feb 2018 15:34, "Johannes Schlüter" wrote:
> On Mo, 2018-02-12 at 14:36 -0600, Michael Morris wrote:
> > Any particular reason why "`unicode string `" wouldn't work?
>
> Because this would be a BC break which is really hard to detect. People
> might do thi
On Mo, 2018-02-12 at 14:36 -0600, Michael Morris wrote:
> Any particular reason why "`unicode string `" wouldn't work?
Because this would be a BC break which is really hard to detect. People
might do this (i.e. while generating Markdown output or something about
shell scripting or ...) and this mi
On 02/12/2018 11:43 AM, Wes wrote:
Again, the reason is: in case in future PHP wants to use backticks for
unicode strings, like javascript.
If the community think it's feasible, in PHP 9, 10, whatever, it must be
deprecated asap.
If you think PHP should use a different syntax for unicode strings
On 12/02/18 20:43, Wes wrote:
No technical reason. Keep in mind that people dislike... a lot... writing
\strlen() (with the leading \) so I thought they would also dislike writing
u"unicode" or any other solution that uses more than 2 enclosing characters.
My personal fix for that particular pr
No technical reason. Keep in mind that people dislike... a lot... writing
\strlen() (with the leading \) so I thought they would also dislike writing
u"unicode" or any other solution that uses more than 2 enclosing characters.
On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 1:43 PM, Wes wrote:
> Again, the reason is: in case in future PHP wants to use backticks for
> unicode strings, like javascript.
> If the community think it's feasible, in PHP 9, 10, whatever, it must be
> deprecated asap.
> If you think PHP should use a different syntax f
I totally agree to deprecate and remove it in 8.0.
Some reasons:
It usage is very rare (actually, I don't remeber the last time that I see
that in use). Even in old codes.
It too could causes confusion with single-quote in some fonts, sizes and
styles.
Is more easy to identify shell_exec() than
Again, the reason is: in case in future PHP wants to use backticks for
unicode strings, like javascript.
If the community think it's feasible, in PHP 9, 10, whatever, it must be
deprecated asap.
If you think PHP should use a different syntax for unicode strings in
future, you vote no.
It's as simpl
Hi!
On 2/12/18 10:26 AM, Wes wrote:
> There is not much to say. You either agree with it or you don't. And I
That's not how consensus discussion process in RFCs should work. It's
not just throwing your opinion over the fence, because the response
would be https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX
░░▄▄███░
░░▄▄░███
░░███▄░▄█▀░█
░░▀█░▄███▀▀░▀███
███▀▀░░▀▀▀█████▀
██░░▄░░░▀▀▄▄███░
▄█▄▄▀█░█▄██▄▄░▀░
░░░▄
On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 2:41 PM, Wes wrote:
> Hello PHPeople, I present to you... the shortest RFC ever.
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/deprecate-backtick-operator
>
> Let me know what you think!
>
░░▄▄███░
░░▄▄░███
░░███▄░░
There is not much to say. You either agree with it or you don't. And I
wasn't trying to make fun of none of you. Sorry if you consider the version
number inappropriate ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
2018-02-12 15:38 GMT+01:00 Eli White :
> I'll chime in on the "What evidence do you have that this is not
> widely-used" ... in fact, I have seen through my PHP career this used very
> regularly, and training/workshop/class sessions at conferences still
> regularly teach this as the 'standard way'
On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:38 AM, Eli White wrote:
> I'll chime in on the "What evidence do you have that this is not
> widely-used" ... in fact, I have seen through my PHP career this used very
> regularly, and training/workshop/class sessions at conferences still
> regularly teach this as the 's
I'll chime in on the "What evidence do you have that this is not
widely-used" ... in fact, I have seen through my PHP career this used very
regularly, and training/workshop/class sessions at conferences still
regularly teach this as the 'standard way' to handle shell commands.
So I think that this
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 3:16 PM, CHU Zhaowei wrote:
> Hello,
>
>>But that being said, I do support the proposal. I understand people
>>opposed to removing features for no reason, but nobody needs this to
>>be an operator, it's not a widely-used one, and we all know if it was
>>proposed for ad
Hello,
>But that being said, I do support the proposal. I understand people
>opposed to removing features for no reason, but nobody needs this to
>be an operator, it's not a widely-used one, and we all know if it was
>proposed for addition today it would have 0 chance of acceptance.
How do you
Hi,
I agree with the criticism towards the RFC contents raised so far.
It's obviously put together with as little effort as possible, and the
cheeky version number doesn't help either ... Treating the RFC process
as a joke doesn't get you support.
But that being said, I do support the proposal. I
Sounded reasonable to me. At least for security.
On 11 February 2018 at 21:24, Stanislav Malyshev
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > It's absolutely impossible to treat notices as errors in PHP, so I
> > assume everybody thinks the same. If someone converts notices to
> > ErrorExceptions or something, it's thei
Please stay on topic. Thank you.
On 2/11/2018 9:45 PM, Michael Morris wrote:
If we are going to go about removing stupid operators in PHP, the current
use of @ as an error suppression operator is much higher on the list since
encourages people to write bad code by sweeping problems under the rug
Or people don't like how PHP curr
On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 1:41 PM, Wes wrote:
> Hello PHPeople, I present to you... the shortest RFC ever.
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/deprecate-backtick-operator
>
> Let me know what you think!
>
-1, not that my vote matters, but huge -1.
Nothing of value is gained by doing this. If there is so
Hi!
> It's absolutely impossible to treat notices as errors in PHP, so I
> assume everybody thinks the same. If someone converts notices to
> ErrorExceptions or something, it's their fault.
> A notice in tests is exactly what a deprecation is supposed to do, force
> people to update their code.
I
Hi Stas thanks for the feedback. I've added more info for more clarity.
It's absolutely impossible to treat notices as errors in PHP, so I assume
everybody thinks the same. If someone converts notices to ErrorExceptions
or something, it's their fault.
A notice in tests is exactly what a deprecatio
Hi!
> Hello PHPeople, I present to you... the shortest RFC ever.
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/deprecate-backtick-operator
>
> Let me know what you think!
I think we need a bit more explanation that that. Why would we want to
use backticks for Unicode strings? Why we need to deprecate existing
f
Hello PHPeople, I present to you... the shortest RFC ever.
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/deprecate-backtick-operator
Let me know what you think!
32 matches
Mail list logo
