Re: [RFC] Pipe Operator (again)
| From: | Tim Düsterhus | Date: | Sat, 08 Feb 2025 11:41:43 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] Pipe Operator (again) | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-126349@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Hi
On 2/8/25 05:05, Larry Garfield wrote:
Associativity is not explicitly spelled out (though only left associativity makes sense). And for the ternary conditional, the phrasing is pretty non-technical:Indeed, precendence and associativity need to be mentioned in the RFC.I've added a precedence section, using examples from the tests and this thread.
it will likely need to be enclosed in () or else it will be misinterpreted.What does “misinterpreted” mean in concrete terms? In the stated example there is only one possible way to interpret it as a legal PHP program. Does this mean it will syntax error without the parentheses? Explicitly state the error message then. Best regards Tim Düsterhus