Re: [RFC] [Discussion] Shorter Attribute Syntax Change

Hi all, > On Jul 28, 2020, at 12:57, Theodore Brown <theodorejb@outlook.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, July 28, 2020 at 9:46 AM Joe Ferguson <joe@joeferguson.me> wrote: >> >> ... >> >> Feedback to Derick's tweet (https://twitter.com/derickr/status/1285912223639130114) >> were [sic] overwhelmingly positive > > Are you sure? I took a look at the thread and it seems like the > responses were pretty mixed. Let's count. + is "change away from @@ to anything else", - is "stay with @@", ? is hard-to-tell/weak/uncertain/they-all-suck. Derick Rethans: ++ Rafael Dohms: +? Alexander Berl: -? Chris Emerson: -- Tamas Erdelyi: ?? Phili Weinke: ?? Trent: ++ Juriaan Ruitenberg: ++ Mehran: ++ Stephan Hochdorfer: ?? Cees-Jan Kiewiet: ?? Tom Witkowski: ++ Matiss: ++ Henry Paradiz: -- Saif: ?? Paul Redmond: ?? Marco Pivetta: ++ Simon Champion: ?? @eimihar: ?? Brent: +? Graham Campbell: +? Dmitri Goosens: ++ Sergej Kurakin: -? Francis Lavoie: ?? Michael Moravec: ?? John Hunt: ?? Lars Moelleken: ?? Michal Brzuchalski: -? Kyrre: ?? Steve MacDougall: ++ Agustin Gomes: ?? Mike Rockett: ++ Matias Navarro: ++ Marisa Clardy: ++ Warp Speed: -- WJB: +? Martijn Minnis: -- Dennis de Best: ?? Damo: ?? SOFTonSOFA: +? Ashish K. Poudel: +? Bastien Remy: ?? Matiss: +? Thierry D.: +? Ihor Vorotnov: ?? Hugo Alliaume: ?? Juan Millan: +? Olbaum: +? Steve Baumann: ?? James Mallison: ?? Marco Deleu: ?? TheGenuinenessSheriff: ++ Golgote: ?? ++: 13 definitely prefer changing to something other than @@ (though not necessarily #[]) +?: 10 probably prefer changing to something other than @@ (though not necessarily #[]) ??: 23 hard-to-tell/weak/uncertain/they-all-suck -?: 3 probably prefer to keep @@ --: 4 definitely prefer to keep @@ So, the majority of Twitter respondents in that thread appear to be against @@, and in favor of "something else" (24 to 7). Having pointed all that out, I note that Twitter is not the voting mechanism here. Further, I opine that "voting repeatedly until the voters get it 'right' and then calling the matter settled for all time" is not how decision-by-voting is supposed to work. Now, it may be that #[] or <<>> or something else actually is "better" in some sense that cannot be articulated. But if there are no existing technical hurdles to be overcome with the already-voted-on-and-accepted solution of @@, what technically compelling reason can there be to revote? -- Paul M. Jones pmjones@pmjones.io http://paul-m-jones.com Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP https://leanpub.com/mlaphp Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP https://leanpub.com/sn1php