Hi
Given your planned timeline of voting, I wanted to chime in here before
my vacation. I'll likely only see the reply on Monday morning.
On 11/13/25 10:01, Edmond Dantes wrote:
If anyone else is working on comments for the RFC, please let me know.
If there are no objections, we can start the vote on Monday.
It appears that you believe that the RFC and the proposal finally
settled. I frankly lost track of what has been discussed in all the
different discussion threads related to various Async RFCs.
What I am missing from the RFC text is some kind of "Executive Summary"
to make it clear what *is* and what *is not* actually being proposed.
The RFC starts of with goals and a glossary that primarily explains by
means of an example.
This makes it hard for me to see what I am actually voting for (and what
I am not), especially after the many changes to refine the RFC. I would
suggest to add a “full stub” (as suggested in the RFC template
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/template#proposal) at the start and also to
shortly explain what is proposed and what is left untouched (e.g. the
RFC already mentions that file_get_contents is not proposed to change,
but that is easy to miss without carefully reading everything) before
diving into the details for each of the functions.
With regard to the relationship with fibers, it is not clear to me why
e.g. Fiber::suspend() could map to Async\suspend() and why the Async
event loop couldn't call ->resume() on suspended Fibers. Elaborating a
little more would be helpful I think.
Also, please make sure to add the “Abstain” option to the vote
(https://wiki.php.net/rfc/rfc_vote_abstain).
Best regards
Tim Düsterhus
