On 3 Aug 2014, at 13:51, Zeev Suraski <z...@zend.com> wrote:

> Based on the discussion on internals@ I'm not sure why it should not be
> construed as consensus against any kind of operator for intdiv.  Quite the
> contrary, those who opposed it (myself included) opposed it on the grounds
> that it's not nearly commonly used to be worth a dedicated operator.
> Quoting one of those who opposed, "IMHO this is not enough for a new
> operator... Especially if this means we have to tolerate something like
> %/" (note both the operator being different from the one that ended up
> being proposed in the RFC, and the key objection being the necessity of
> needing this as an operator in the first place).
> 
>> To save hassle, could I not modify the current RFC and hold another
> vote? I
>> don't see why we'd need an entirely new RFC.
> 
> I think that the best way to save us all hassle is to accept that there's
> overwhelming majority against introducing a dedicated operator for this
> use case...
> I think a revote should be considered only if you come up with a concrete
> alternative, and you get a pretty good reason to believe that the results
> will be different (e.g. by asking 5-10 people who voted 'no' on the
> current RFC and getting a 'yes' from at least some of them).  We need to
> be respectful of people's time - and generally not assume that something
> that was voted upon and rejected, will be accepted after minor mods.

Right. While I’d love to hold another vote and get it in, I know it’s not going 
to happen. Just switching to %/ or something is not going to really change the 
general consensus against the need for %%. At best, it might mean one more vote 
in favour but it’s hardly going to swing it.

Unless someone presents me a proposal that will somehow get this a 2/3 majority 
and actually pleases everyone, it’s not going to be reopened.

--
Andrea Faulds
http://ajf.me/





--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to