Re: [RFC] Named parameters
| From: | Michael Shadle | Date: | Fri, 06 Sep 2013 17:47:26 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] Named parameters | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-68917@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
+1 to named params. Please please please. :)
=> is my vote for syntax. Makes sense. Doesn't make sense to introduce another way to
express something we've been used to for years with key => value, and is it that important
to save one character per assignment?
On Sep 6, 2013, at 9:39 AM, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi internals!
>
> I created an RFC and preliminary implementation for named parameters:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/named_params
>
> The RFC and implementation are not yet complete. I mainly want to have
> feedback on the idea in general and on the Open Questions (
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/named_params#open_questions) in
> particular.
>
> Thanks,
> Nikita