eigan's avatar

Einar

eigan

Member since

35

Total Reputation

1

Total Arguments

5

Total Votes for Arguments

Arguments and votes

1

I do not like this syntax at all and have no problem with user-land solutions.

Share:
Read the RFC: The Pipe Operator eigan avatar
eigan
voted no
35

I see no immediate benefit of the proposed solution over the userland implementations. The RFC mentions a shopping cart example, but I don't think that's cleaner than using league/pipeline or Laravel's pipeline.

It's a bit messy for the simpler examples as well.

Share:
Read the RFC: The Pipe Operator ju5t avatar
ju5t
voted no
18

It's almost as messy as putting all the functions into each other.

Share:
Read the RFC: The Pipe Operator t avatar
t
voted no
15

The idea is a nice one, and one that I would welcome, but this proposal puts forward messy syntax that isn't clear!

Share:
Read the RFC: The Pipe Operator ollieread avatar
ollieread
voted no
75
  • Interface shall stay light, pure contracts defining expectations, else they are just abstract classes with multi-inheritance.
  • If multi-inheritance is the subject, a specific RFC shall be done on this.
  • An other away might be to dig back this RFC to add interface to traits: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/traits-with-interfaces
Share:
Read the RFC: Interface Default Methods victor avatar
victor
voted no
RSS Feed Contribute Watch on YouTube Our License
© 2024 RFC Vote. This project is open source. Contribute and collaborate with us!