Jocelyn, I think that a good migration guide is what we need here, and as Dmitry and Ferenc said, much progress has been made there.
I think we'd all welcome a new edition of the Sara book, but it happens that the main people who work on PHP internals aren't exactly the book authoring types... We'd need others to step in and contribute, perhaps turn that migration doc into something better. Zeev On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Jocelyn Fournier < jocelyn.fourn...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> >>> Hi Laruence, >> >> I do think that some people simply doesn't like phpng (for reasons mostly >> not on technical grounds), and they are bringing up any issue which can >> hinder the acceptance of phpng. >> But I also think that documentation is important, and the reasoning that >> it >> isn't based on the fact that the current engine is also lacked/lacking >> proper documentation is wrong imo. >> There are a bunch of extensions whose authors already figured out the >> current internals on their own (but stuff like Sara's book helped a bunch >> imo) to make their extension work, but we shouldn't force them yet again >> to >> learn from reading through the source yet again. >> Also, the less documentation we have, the more likely that the voters >> won't >> really base their vote on the actual diff, but they >> beliefs/pre-conceptions >> about phpng. >> As both sides (supporters of phpng and those who are against it) are >> really >> "loud" to have their arguments heard, I think it would be better for >> everybody if we could have as many voters as possible voting on the actual >> content instead of who has the bigger follower/supporter group. >> And as you mentioned, not that many people are familiar with the Zend >> internals, but the vote is open for any contributors (which we had a few >> rounds of discussion, but it is unlikely to be changed before this goes >> into voting), I think it is even more important to make it possible for >> the >> less Zend-savy people to make an educated decision about the patch. >> I really like the current progress on https://wiki.php.net/phpng- >> upgrading >> , and I support your idea of having more people, even outside of the phpng >> devs contributing to the docs. >> (I added a link to the upgrading guide for the rfc page as I've noticed >> that some people wasn't even aware of the existence of the upgrading docs) >> >> I don't think that phpng requires any better or more detailed rfc or docs >> than any other similar rfc, but I do think that improving those will >> improve the "quality" of the votes, and maybe it will calm down some loud >> people seemingly being really frustrated by the lack of documentation. >> >> > Hi, > > I confirm without the sara book, it would have been *really* difficult to > code my first php extension. > From my point of view, this API change is a good opportunity to write a > doc about the PHP API, and how to use it efficiently. > > Jocelyn > > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >
