Re: internals Digest 13 Apr 2012 01:23:19 -0000 Issue 2650

> From: Arvids Godjuks <arvids.godjuks@gmail.com> > To: Kris Craig <kris.craig@gmail.com> > Cc: PHP internals list <internals@lists.php.net>, Yasuo Ohgaki > <yohgaki@ohgaki.net> > Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 03:26:16 +0300 > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] New .phpp File Type for Pure-Code PHP Scripts > Well, I just don't know how i can appeal to common sence to some people on > the list anymore. First the type hinting threads, now this. That was my reaction as well. Why someone would spend this much time and documentation on such a trivial issue, I'm at a loss. Don't we have bigger fish to fry? > The world does not work only on one web server and there are different type > ls of them out there. I for once use nginx and i configure how to run > scripts by locations, not by file types. I just pass the params to fastcgi > server thet runs a php binary. And it does not.care about the extension. I > can use any extension.l for my code. Yes, i use .php, others use. phtml or > other variants. Extensions are just a convension, nothing more. You can > give a file any or none extension at all and it will not change a thing.Ok, > in windows you will not be able to open the file in a program by double > click, but through the open dialog in the app - be my guest. To PHP, > fastcgi and the web server it does not matter. It just matters to people so > they can distingush between a php file, js file and a css file. This is what I was thinking, plus this: the closing tag isn't even required to begin with, so you can really think of "<?php" as a 5-byte file-header. I don't see how getting rid of the file-type, and relying on file-extension instead, is in any way a good thing. For one, IDEs would need updates, because they use the opening tag to enable syntax-highlighting. If anyone should learn from this, it's the other way around - perhaps other scripting languages should use a small header to declare the language/file-type...