On March 16, 2015 11:10:41 PM GMT+01:00, Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com> wrote: >On Mar 17, 2015 7:05 AM, "Peter Petermann" <ppeterman...@gmail.com> >wrote: >> >> >> >> On March 16, 2015 2:32:39 PM GMT+01:00, Pascal Chevrel < >pascal.chev...@free.fr> wrote: >> >> >It's too late, Bob's Basic STH missed the schedule for PHP 7, it was >> >proposed way too late and the coercive STH RFC has just zero chance >to >> >pass, it's too much of a BC break for everybody. The dual mode STH >is >> >the only chance to have something for PHP 7 and remain competitive >with >> Rushing through with an controversial solution, because others didn't >make a date seems like such a good plan. >> >> No one is dying if STH doesn't make it into 7.0.0. > >No one will die if php dies. Your point here is totally irrelevant. PHP isn't dying without it. At least it hasn't in the last few years since it exists.
> >> >HHVM, Node.js… that we see people switch to. Baidu switched to HHVM, >> >Wikipedia too, in my country big names switched from PHP to node.js >and >> >that was not just for performance reasons, it was also for the >> >features. >> hhvm offers an alternative php implementation that tries to be >compatible, hack(lang) is where you find the differences you are >looking >for. That said, I don't see the sky falling if people who need a >specific >feature use another tool. The adoption rate of hack is tiny. >> >> As for nodejs, nodejs is a framework, not a language. Javascript does >not >offer type hints. And if you look at how to compete with nodejs, then >what >you should be looking at is what needs to be improved with php to allow >frameworks like reactphp to work better. How to improve support for >non-blocking io. >> >> And I dunno, but I don't think that "per file" settings make the >callback-heavy code that's typical for non-blocking stuff better, in >fact >I'm convinced it will add an additional layer of headache. >> >> >Zeev himself admitted that we need something for PHP 7. >> If it is THAT important for PHP 7 (and IMHO it's not) then maybe the >timeline for PHP 7 needs to be reevaluated, to make sure all >dependencies >are the best option and not something rushed in because of >::conflict::. > >I think you may talk to more developers. I have talked to many, at many >confs and UGs (and way too many in the last few weeks, across the >pacific), >I can count users not looking for STH with one hand. As I said, if you take it for THAT important, it should be in your own interest to get it right instead of rushing through a controversial compromise. Regards, PP. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
