Re: Re: Disabling PHP tags by php.ini and CLI options
| From: | Kris Craig | Date: | Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:37:45 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Disabling PHP tags by php.ini and CLI options | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-59739@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com> wrote:
> On 04/11/2012 08:12 AM, Luke Scott wrote:
> > Tom has a "similar" RFC that has two modes:
> >
> > - Template mode - how it is now
> > - Code (or pure code) mode - <?php is only allowed at the top and is
> > optional. ?> is disallowed.
> >
> > Tom's RFC calls for template mode to remain the default, but allow you
> > to add a flag to require/include to interpret the script in "pure
> > mode". Allowing an optional starting <?php (only at top) maintains
> > backwards compatibility with most classes.
>
> And my objection to that is similar. An optional templating mode is the
> same as optional short_tags. it discourages template mode the same way
> short_tags are discouraged. For short_tags that discouragement makes
> sense. For templating it doesn't.
>
I have some objections to that RFC as well, but one question that comes to
my mind is, does allowing a "pure code" PHP mode really *discourage* use of
templating mode; and, if so, how? From an MVC architectural standpoint, I
can actually see some benefit in having a type of code-only PHP file,
though Tom's current RFC negates that by allowing HTML bits to be included
upstream so I'll probably be voting it down anyway. But conceptually, at
least, I think the idea has some merit IMHO.
--Kris
>
> -Rasmus
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>