You lost me. There are specific reasons for the tags we have.
Consistency is about supporting = for all three tags we have, not about
creating new tags.
Shane
Chris Newbill wrote:
>
> 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
>
> --
> 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