June 27, 2020 14:21 (Rowan Tommins)
On 27/06/2020 10:56, Andrea Faulds wrote:
> Of course, if T_PAAMAYIM_NEKUDOTAYIM was never encountered by userland > developers, this RFC wouldn't exist. The thing is, I don't think > T_DOUBLE_COLON should be encountered by userland developers either — > in my view, as an implementation detail, token names shouldn't be part > of parser error messages at all. If we were to remove token names from > the parser errors, we would avoid the problem this RFC seeks to solve. > For most tokens we could simply display the characters it corresponds > to (e.g. "::" for T_PAAMAYIM_NEKUDOTAYIM, which we already do!), and > for those with variable content (e.g. T_STRING) we could display a > human-readable description of what is expected (e.g. "an identifier").
Just to confirm, I am actively working on exactly this, and although slightly delayed by an outbreak of sunny weather, fully expect to have a patch (and, if deemed necessary, RFC) in plenty of time for 8.0. I intend to post a new thread with examples of old and new messages once I've finalised the details. Regards, -- Rowan Tommins (né Collins) [IMSoP]