|
Posted by Miles Thompson on 11/15/05 19:42
At 01:25 PM 11/15/2005, Jim Moseby wrote:
> >
> > Jim Moseby wrote:
> > >>Robin Vickery wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>On 11/15/05, Roman Ivanov <gamblergluck@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>Can '<?=' be used for templates, or is it "a bad thing"?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>The manual's reasonably explicit on the subject:
> > >>>
> > >>>"Note: Using short tags should be avoided when developing
> > >>>applications or libraries that are meant for redistribution, or
> > >>>deployment on PHP servers which are not under your control, because
> > >>>short tags may not be supported on the target server. For portable,
> > >>>redistributable code, be sure not to use short tags."
> > >>
> > >>I've seen this note. But I haven't seen a single server where
> > >>short tags
> > >>were disabled.
> > >
> > >
> > > Nor have I. However, if I use long tags, my script will
> > *always* work. If
> > > I use short tags there is a *possibility* that it won't.
> > So, when writing
> > > code that is required to be portable, there is no reason to
> > ever use short
> > > tags.
> >
> > so how many people actually _need_ to write portable code?
>
>I don't know, but those who do should not use short tags. And those who
>hope to should not get into the habit of using short tags.
>
> > ok
> > so many you
> > are starting a project which will become a runaway success
> > but until it starts
> > receiving alot of attention use of short-open-tags is
> > probably not your biggest
> > issue either.
>
>It will be when you have to sort through 1,000,000 lines of code in 400
>files to change '<?' to '<?PHP'. Better to save the grief and do it right
>to start with, no?
>
> >
> > lets assume that everyone should be writing completely
> > portable apps, why does this
> > ini setting exist? what is the point of offering a setting
> > that can be set to a
> > bad(tm) value by design?
>
>I don't know. A very good question for the PHP architects. :o)
>
>JM
>
Re 1,000,000 lines .... awk, sed, UltraEdit?
Miles
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|