On 22 Jul 2014, at 23:48, Sara Golemon <poll...@php.net> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Andrea Faulds <a...@ajf.me> wrote: >> On 22 Jul 2014, at 23:37, Larry Garfield <la...@garfieldtech.com> wrote: >>> The big question here, though, is whether, going forward, we'll be >>> able to mentally switch to a "spec first" mentality. If not, the spec will >>> get out of date and become less than useful. I hope we're able to >>> make that transition. >> >> I think that’s unrealistic. It will always be Zend code first, spec second. >> HHVM can play catch-up ;) >> > I dunno, with syntax changes being 2/3rd majority and our formal RFC > process in place, I think we (PHP) can reasonably learn to make > updating the spec a formal part of our process.
Ah, I think you misunderstand. What I mean is that we should only propose RFCs which change the spec when there is already a working implementation first. Otherwise, we might add things to the spec which won’t or can’t get implemented. It would also be best to propose changes which have been implemented in Zend, to ensure there is one fully compliant implementation. -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
