Hi Sara, Obviously a great idea that would make a lot of people's life easier all around.
One question though? How would api extensions be handled on both sides and would it be at all possible to keep the APIs consistent across hvvm / php versions? I imagine that there would need to be consensus on both php / hhvm teams to add any extra functionality, is this correct? On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 5:14 AM, Sara Golemon <poll...@php.net> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Paul Dragoonis <dragoo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Somewhat Pie in the sky but at the same time also achievable with good > > planning and design. I'd support this definitely and this abstraction > layer > > would solve constant maintainability of extensions by not having to > update > > themselves constantly to support latest versions of PHP due to a lack of > > abstraction. > > > Yep. Exactly what I'm thinking. > > I forsee defining this PHP<->Native Interface (I hereby dub it "PNI") > as part of the php-langspec such that part of being a conforming > implementation includes supporting this API. > > -Sara > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >
