RE: [PHP-DEV] </endnamespacediscussion>

Ok, for short: "Cry havoc, and let loose the dogs of war." The fact that they chose '\' instead of ::: or anything else is going to be a killer to teach for novice PHP devs. Just my 0.02$ ... > -----Original Message----- > From: Stan Vassilev | FM [mailto:sv_forums@fmethod.com] > Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2008 10:04 AM > To: PHP internals > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] </endnamespacediscussion> > > > Hi, > > I want to thank you all for opting for the technically sound, clear and > performant solution. Of course some users will never understand the > precise > reasons :: was avoided, but it's something we'll have to live with, > given > some past design choices in PHP. > > Regarding "foo\tbar" turning into "foo[tab]bar", I just wanted to throw > it > out there, although I don't think it's a great idea. We have only few > escape > combinations in string literals which can also be in a valid identifier: > > \t \n \r > > There are also some which aren't a problem since they can't be in a > valid > identifier: > > \x.. \0 \\ \$ \' \" \{..} etc. > > So the problem is with exactly three combos: \t, \n and \r. In the few > places PHP takes class/function identifiers as strings, TAB, CR and LF > could > be interpolated back into the two characters they express, since TAB, CR > and > LF aren't valid on their own in identifiers, so ambiguity is not > possible. > > Those places of the top of my mind are: new $class(), $class::property, > call_user_*(), _autoload, and all other places accepting callbacks. > > This would mean both of those will work correctly: "foo\\tbar" and > "foo\tbar" when used as an identifier. > > Think of it as a plan B in case people cause a big fuss about it (which > I > think they won't: think about escaping of windows file paths and > escaping in > regex pattern, we're doing just fine there). > > Regards, > Stan Vassilev > > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php