Uhmm that logic dictates then you must also have <%php=, and <%php, and ...
I don't see the point in having it, we already give people enough rope to
hang themselves.
-Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Shane Caraveo [mailto:shane@caraveo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 11:37 PM
To: Andi Gutmans
Cc: Philip Olson; PHP Developer List
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] <?php= ?> sytanx again
Andi Gutmans wrote:
>
> Implementing this is not a problem but it seems that there is no consensus
> on adding it.
> I'm not sure what I think. I was very much against <?= but now it exists
> and is used by a lot of people it might be good to have <?php= but then
> again I can't make up my mind :)
> Andi
When you cannot make up your mind, choose consistency. In this case,
like it or not, the consistent thing to do is add it. It's odd and
inconsistent to have <%=, <?=, but not <?php=.
Shane
--
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: php-dev-unsubscribe@lists.php.net
For additional commands, e-mail: php-dev-help@lists.php.net
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: php-list-admin@lists.php.net