> On Jul 28, 2020, at 14:07, Ben Ramsey <b...@benramsey.com> wrote: > >> On Jul 28, 2020, at 13:55, Paul M. Jones <pmjo...@pmjones.io> wrote: >> >> Now, it may be that #[] or <<>> or something else actually is "better" in >> some sense that cannot be articulated. But if there are no existing >> technical hurdles to be overcome with the already-voted-on-and-accepted >> solution of @@, what technically compelling reason can there be to revote? > > > IMO, there is no compelling reason to revote other than the fact that we have > no process for what to do in this situation.
What "situation" is this, exactly? AFICT we have a working implementation using @@, with no technical hurdles to surmount. Or have I missed something that now prevents @@ from working per its RFC? -- Paul M. Jones pmjo...@pmjones.io http://paul-m-jones.com Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP https://leanpub.com/mlaphp Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP https://leanpub.com/sn1php
