Re: [RFC][VOTE] Rename T_PAAMAYIM_NEKUDOTAYIM to T_DOUBLE_COLON
| From: | Claude Pache | Date: | Mon, 29 Jun 2020 07:08:46 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC][VOTE] Rename T_PAAMAYIM_NEKUDOTAYIM to T_DOUBLE_COLON | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-110765@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
> Le 28 juin 2020 à 00:53, G. P. B. <george.banyard@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> My perception is that most of the community finds it baffling why anyone
> would be against this change.
>
What baffles me, is the amount of discussion around changing the name of ONE token, whereas it is
clear that a bunch of tokens (a few of them explicitly mentioned during the discussion phase of the
RFC) have incomprehensible names, or worse, misleading names (T_STRING instead of T_IDENTIFIER),
several of them appearing more often in error messages than T_DOUBLE_COLON (so, to be super-clear,
I’m not talking about T_SL). And at this point I have still restricted my view to the issue of
token name, whereas there is an obvious way to do better at relatively low cost, namely replacing
the token name with a user-friendly description of the token.
I really appreciate the efforts made to make PHP better; thanks for that. But I friendly suggest
that, each time you are going to propose an improvement, you take first a step back and consider how
your change fits in its wider context.
—Claude