Re: '<?=' with PHP5.3.10
Responses inline per your request.
--Kris
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 3:32 AM, Reindl Harald <[email protected]>wrote:
> Am 06.03.2012 01:13, schrieb Kris Craig:
> > On Windows (where I generally do most of my scripting grunt work),
> > I typically use Notepad++ and it highlights
> > <?php just fine.
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Reindl Harald <[email protected]<mailto:
> [email protected]>> wrote:
> > Am 06.03.2012 01:03, schrieb Kris Craig:
> > > I've never understood the "it's easier to read" argument
> > > since
> I've found
> > > it to be exactly the opposite. The <? as opposed to <?php, at
> least for
> > > me, makes it more difficult to "at a glance" see where the PHP
> code begins
> >
> > if you hvae a usebale editor <?=$whatever?> would become different
> colors
> > only in notepad or on the shell you would not see php-code but
> > who does develop this way these days?
>
> FIRST:
> do NOT top post after get a reply below your text
> or how do you imagine that anybody can follow a
> thread where answers randomly before and after
> the quotet text?
>
Sorry. Sometimes I forget that there are some people out there who still
use legacy non-threaded inboxes. I would recommend you consider switching
to Gmail or some other email client/service that supports threaded views.
That will make it a lot easier for you to follow these threads. =)
>
> SECOND:
> it is simply clear that it highlights "<?php" - what do you try to tell me?
> what i said is "throw it away if it does NOT highlight "<?=$var?>"
>
> the "<?=$var?>" is much easier readable as "<?php echo $var;?>"
>
>
>
To clarify again, I was under the mistaken impression that <?= was a new
alias for short_open_tag. My argument was (and still is) against
short_open_tag. I do see some use in this new echo alias for templating
purposes.
--Kris
Thread (28 messages)