Moving from -> to . for object operators?

Ask a Question related to PHP Development, Design and Development.

  1. #1

    Default Moving from -> to . for object operators?

    Is there a way to change PHP's source and recompile so that I can use
    "." instead of "->" for the object operator? Of course, I would also
    change "." (the concat operator) to "&" or "+" for the concat
    operator.

    I think it's as simple as editing "zend_language_scanner.l" from the
    source, changing "." to "&", and "->" to ".", then recompiling, but I
    haven't tested this. Has anyone done that before?
    Google Mike Guest

  2. Similar Questions and Discussions

    1. example of moving an object using code
      i am looking for a simple dir file where i can see how objects are being moved in the space i look for the dir file+the original 3d max or maya...
    2. Moving anchor points vs. entire object?
      This is going to be tough to explain but gonna try... Basically i draw a square with 4 anchor points. now i want to move one of the anchor points...
    3. AI CS freezes when moving an object
      I'm finding this happening more often lately (several times a week), where I'll drag an object in Illustrator CS, and it freezes, leaving me with a...
    4. Why is my axis point not moving with my object?
      In CS I have had trouble when I drag a vector object, the axis (center point) does not follow along when I drag the image. Then when I go to scale...
    5. Moving Randomly Moving Sprite To New Location on mouseEnter
      Hi All, This is way over my head. I am currently using Director 8. I have a randomly moving sprite(call it X) on stage (I accomplished this...
  3. #2

    Default Re: Moving from -> to . for object operators?

    Hi Google Mike!

    On 20 Oct 2003 13:54:47 -0700, [email]googlemike@hotpop.com[/email] (Google Mike)
    wrote:
    >Is there a way to change PHP's source and recompile so that I can use
    >"." instead of "->" for the object operator? Of course, I would also
    >change "." (the concat operator) to "&" or "+" for the concat
    >operator.
    >
    >I think it's as simple as editing "zend_language_scanner.l" from the
    >source, changing "." to "&", and "->" to ".", then recompiling, but I
    >haven't tested this. Has anyone done that before?
    Have you done that with any language before? Its all 1's and 0's in
    the end, but I doubt it is that easy. What about the + and the &
    operator. What about the ones you replace it with?

    SCNR,

    Jochen

    --
    Jochen Daum - CANS Ltd.
    PHP DB Edit Toolkit -- PHP scripts for building
    database editing interfaces.
    [url]http://sourceforge.net/projects/phpdbedittk/[/url]
    Jochen Daum Guest

  4. #3

    Default Re: Moving from -> to . for object operators?

    Jochen Daum <jochen.daum@cans.co.nz> wrote
    > Have you done that with any language before? Its all 1's and 0's in
    > the end, but I doubt it is that easy. What about the + and the &
    > operator. What about the ones you replace it with?
    Nah. I think my suggested gameplan is the desired course. I'll attempt it.
    Google Mike Guest

  5. #4

    Default Re: Moving from -> to . for object operators?

    "Google Mike" <googlemike@hotpop.com> wrote in message
    news:25d8d6a8.0310201254.2740bc6c@posting.google.c om...
    > I think it's as simple as editing "zend_language_scanner.l" from the
    > source, changing "." to "&", and "->" to ".", then recompiling, but I
    > haven't tested this. Has anyone done that before?
    What you suggest is equivalent of running sed (or any other search and
    replace) over your source and and changing "." to "&".

    While running sed would be much simpler than poking over the lex files,
    neither would work properly. You would need to get up in your arms in mud of
    scanner and parser to change things at least a bit meaningfully. And even
    then I am not sure that the grammar you are proposing can be implemented
    properly (for instance can you distinguish use of & as concat operator, and
    use of & as reference operator?)

    rush
    --
    [url]http://www.templatetamer.com/[/url]



    rush Guest

  6. #5

    Default Re: Moving from -> to . for object operators?

    Does the ability to run all the millions of lines of existing PHP code
    bother you? Is this some way of forcing yourself to write all your own
    libraries and programs to do everything?

    While you're at it, maybe you should translate all the language keywords
    into Mingrelian and build your own keyboard out of peanut shells and
    bubblegum for writing Google Mike Mingrelian-Dotted-Notation PHP.

    Google Mike wrote:
    > Is there a way to change PHP's source and recompile so that I can use
    > "." instead of "->" for the object operator? Of course, I would also
    > change "." (the concat operator) to "&" or "+" for the concat
    > operator.
    >
    > I think it's as simple as editing "zend_language_scanner.l" from the
    > source, changing "." to "&", and "->" to ".", then recompiling, but I
    > haven't tested this. Has anyone done that before?
    sk Guest

  7. #6

    Default Re: Moving from -> to . for object operators?

    On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 15:19:29 +0000, sk wrote:

    <snip!>
    > While you're at it, maybe you should translate all the language keywords
    > into Mingrelian and build your own keyboard out of peanut shells and
    > bubblegum for writing Google Mike Mingrelian-Dotted-Notation PHP.
    <snip!>

    That made me laugh out loud! Thanks.
    --
    Jeffrey D. Silverman | jeffrey AT jhu DOT edu
    Johns Hopkins University | Baltimore, MD
    Website | [url]http://www.wse.jhu.edu/newtnotes/[/url]

    Jeffrey Silverman Guest

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139