On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Nikita Popov
> wrote:
>
>> Imho it should be supported regardless of whether we want to remove it
>> or not - for the sake of consistency.
>
> If we ever want to have a consistent syntax, then no, we should n
hi,
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Nikita Popov
wrote:
> Imho it should be supported regardless of whether we want to remove it
> or not - for the sake of consistency.
If we ever want to have a consistent syntax, then no, we should not
add it and only support the consistent syntax in new add
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> the alternate syntax has a rough past (if I remember correctly, [] was
> mentioned to be deprecated, then with 5.3 the preference was switched:
> [] is the preferred way now, and {} got almost deprecated), so if we
> plan to support the {} s
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Peter Cowburn wrote:
> Hi Nikita,
>
> On 9 October 2011 18:14, Nikita Popov wrote:
>> Hi list!
>>
>> PHP 5.4 added array dereferencing support (e.g. `func()[1]`), but the
>> grammar seems to lack support for dereferencing using the alternative
>> array access synt
Hi Nikita,
On 9 October 2011 18:14, Nikita Popov wrote:
> Hi list!
>
> PHP 5.4 added array dereferencing support (e.g. `func()[1]`), but the
> grammar seems to lack support for dereferencing using the alternative
> array access syntax (e.g. `func(){1}`). Was this done on purpose or
> was it just
