Re: [RFC] [Vote] Keywords as identifiers

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> wrote: > > > Thumbs up for the idea as well, but I don't think we can live with the > > > implementation. BTW, that's a bit of a grey area but I think that > > > even if an idea is accepted, if there's no reasonably clean > > > implementation available for it, I don't think it can go in. > > > > > > Zeev > > > > As said, if anyone has a good idea how to improve the implementation, > I'd > > be happy to implement it. > > > > (I really can't imagine a better way...) > > I think the point that Derick is trying to make, and that I agree with - > is that if there's no better way to implement it we shouldn't be > implementing it at all. In other words, coming up with a clean > implementation is a requirement before we can go ahead and introduce this > feature into the language. I did not mean to imply you did a poor job > implementing it, I don't presently have an idea of how to make it better. > I'm all +1 with that. Don't forget that we have been leaving with those reserved keyword for ~15y now, and just right. I don't think we should hurry on such a feature adding so much complicated stuff, especially to the lexer. Julien.Pauli