On 12/07/2016 00:14, Jesse Schalken wrote:
If so, some consideration should be made as to which syntax is preferred
to solve this problem generally for both setting properties and calling
methods.
I prefer the "obj { .. }" syntax because it mirrors object literals in
JSON/JavaScript, object init
Hi,
The voted-upon-RFC still has
> session.use_strict_mode (0 to 1) - Changed as insurance of broken PRNG
> implementation.
Although you said:
It was moved to other RFC.
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/session-use-strict-mode
And neither did you restart voting after modifying t
Results for project PHP master, build date 2016-07-12 06:29:11+03:00
commit: 1ba20e3
previous commit:5f6effe
revision date: 2016-07-11 17:01:03-05:00
environment:Haswell-EP
cpu:Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v3 @ 2.30GHz 2x18 cores,
stepping 2, LLC 45 MB
On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 1:55 PM, Michał Brzuchalski <
michal.brzuchal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 11 lip 2016 18:31 "Rasmus Schultz" napisał(a):
> >
> > > what's the actual added value of this sort of operator?
> >
> > The only direct value to the language is brevity - mere convenience.
> >
> > But I
IMO, static methods have very little need for this feature - you
rarely need to make repeated series of static calls and static
property assignments. Let's not complicate this.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 3:54 PM, Michael Morris wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 1:55 PM, Michał Brzuchalski <
> michal
On 12/07/2016 14:54, Michael Morris wrote:
Agreed, but what about static methods? Triple colon perhaps?
A::setFoo(1)
:::setBar(2)
:::setBaz(3);
This is a rather different feature, because you can't really express
that as an expression returning something. What is $result set to if I
run
> Thinking about it, this becomes something more like a "with" keyword
I was starting to think along these lines.
I do like the idea of being able to specify the context for a block -
though, as you say, this feature raises issues, and in e.g.
Javascript, these days, it is now strongly discourage
On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 3:25 AM, Derick Rethans wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The voted-upon-RFC still has
>
> > session.use_strict_mode (0 to 1) - Changed as insurance of broken
> PRNG implementation.
>
> Although you said:
>
> It was moved to other RFC.
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/sessi
Hi Derick,
On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 7:25 PM, Derick Rethans wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The voted-upon-RFC still has
>
>> session.use_strict_mode (0 to 1) - Changed as insurance of broken PRNG
>> implementation.
>
> Although you said:
>
> It was moved to other RFC.
>
> https://wiki.php.n
Hi Davey,
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 6:59 AM, Davey Shafik wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 3:25 AM, Derick Rethans wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> The voted-upon-RFC still has
>>
>> > session.use_strict_mode (0 to 1) - Changed as insurance of broken
>> > PRNG implementation.
>>
>> Although you said:
>>
On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 6:36 PM, Rowan Collins
wrote:
>
> Thinking about it, this becomes something more like a "with" keyword:
>
> with ( $counter ) {
>count();
>count();
>count();
>count();
> }
>
>
The semicolon suggests those lines are arbitrary statements, in which case
it's a
11 matches
Mail list logo
