Re: [RFC] Named arguments

Hey Nikita, This is a bit late response but ah, who cares ;-) I suppose that for consistency with named params, we should also make declare compatible with this syntax. So for example, `declare(strict_types: 1);` would be the same as declare(strict_types=1). This would also make much more sense to newcomers and beginners. Best regards, Benas On Tue, 5 May 2020 at 16:51, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi internals, > > I've recently started a thread on resurrecting the named arguments proposal > (https://externals.io/message/109549), as this has come up tangentially in > some recent discussions around attributes and around object ergonomics. > > I've now updated the old proposal on this topic, and moved it back under > discussion: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/named_params > > Relative to the last time I've proposed this around PHP 5.6 times, I think > we're technically in a much better spot now when it comes to the support > for internal functions, thanks to the stubs work. > > I think the recent acceptance of the attributes proposal also makes this a > good time to bring it up again, as phpdoc annotations have historically had > support for named arguments, and this will make migration to the > language-provided attributes smoother. > > Regards, > Nikita