Kris,
I’ll make it short. EVERY RFC affects the language in *some* way – be it its features, positioning, perception, performance, implementation, testability, you name it. Each and every one, or we wouldn’t be discussing it on php.net’s internals@ mailing list. So I’m afraid I’m not going to use *your* interpretation for what the Voting RFC means (which in effect is either 2/3 majority for every RFC) – but rather, what I *know* is the meaning, and what is clearly the spirit of the RFC. Spirit I say? Here’s what I mean: *“**Given that changes to languages (as opposed to changes to apps or even frameworks) are for the most part irreversible”* Implementation improvements such as PHPNG are not irreversible. New features or changed features are. This deals with language features, that once we publish, we cannot take back as people already start using them. *“the purpose of the vote is to ensure that there's strong support for the proposed feature.”* Is PHPNG a feature? No, it’s not. It’s improvements & performance optimizations at the implementation level. Those who have been following my involvement on internals@ over the years know my position about both feature creep and downwards compatibility, and I’m absolutely certain that it was clear to them – most if not all – what the meaning here was. That’s 100.0% irrelevant to PHPNG. FYI, I don’t intend to ping pong with you about it. I’ve said what I had to say about that topic. Zeev
