Re: Bug #1248: operator ? : has wrong associativity (has left, should be right).

Hi, I think that the ?: operator's associativity should be fixed in PHP 3.0 as well as in PHP 4.0. It is pretty obviously a bug and I doubt fixing it would cause people any grief. Usually people either don't do nested ?:'s or they use parentheses (which you should have done too, as it's cleaner and more readable :). We would of course put a warning in the Changelog or README, so that people know the behaviour has changed very slightly, but then again, I am pretty sure no one has relied on this broken behaviour. What do you guys think? Andi At 00:57 21/03/99 +0100, Peter Kundrat wrote: >On Sun, Mar 21, 1999 at 01:34:16AM +0000, Zeev Suraski wrote: >> This kind of depends on the language definition of PHP. It's true that >> right-associativity would be compatible with C's associativity rules, but >> that's all it is. I'm not sure if it's worth it to change this >> associativity rule at this point; people may have relied on it, and it's >> not a bug in any way. > >Well i might agree with the fact that now it is too late. Anyways >it is kind of unfortunate to redefine the meaning (=associativity) of >"standard" operator. > >> And on a related note, you should *really* be using >> parentheses instead of relying on the precedence rules of any of the >> non-trivial operators. > >Well i wouldnt agree here .. it is questionable what is trivial operator >and what is not. I believe it comes from C so i expect it to work that >way (same in perl and resemblance to perl is quite appealing). > >Of course it is legitimate to redefine any operator to >behave in any way in a new language, but I believe it wasnt your (or whoever >wrote language parser) intention to define it this way. > >Anyways, you are right .. at this moment there arent any options left. >One way would be modify the parser to be able to set the associativity >at run time and have it configurable in config file or runtime directive. >This could lead to reduced portability but my guess is, that those who >write nested ?: operators know it from previous languages so they have to >use parents anyways so it wouldnt hurt them. > > Thanks for reply, > > Peter >-- >Peter Kundrat >kundrat@general-it.sk > >-- >PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ >To unsubscribe send an empty message to php-dev-unsubscribe@lists.php.net >For help: php-dev-help@lists.php.net > > > --- Andi Gutmans <andi@zend.com> ICQ: 1568297 PGP: finger andi@vipe.technion.ac.il -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe send an empty message to php-dev-unsubscribe@lists.php.net For help: php-dev-help@lists.php.net