""Steven Hilder"" wrote in message news:op.y09fz0b4twp9n2@charlie...
Tony,
On 30 May 2017 11:21:38 +0300, Tony Marston <tonymars...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
they should not be forced to change just because some nerd has made a
unilateral decision which is way above his pay grade
On 30 May 2017 16:18:21 +0300, Tony Marston <tonymars...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
just because someone that there should now be a standard. Who gives this
"someone" the right to demand a change in the name of consistency
On 31 May 2017 12:19:59 +0300, Tony Marston <tonymars...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
IMHO it is wrong for someone new to the project to demand that there be a
standard, one of his choosing, and that all existing code be modified to
conform to that standard.
On 02 Jun 2017 10:56:57 +0300, Tony Marston <tonymars...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
I object to some young nerd arriving on the scene and proclaiming to the
world
that he has decided to change the "standards" and demand that everyone
follow.
Who gave him the right to change the standards?the
On 03 Jun 2017 11:10:39 +0300, Tony Marston <tonymars...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
That strikes me as being dictatorial and authoritarian
You're correct that nothing gives any one person the right to demand a
change to
naming conventions or any other element of PHP - hence why nobody here is
making
any such demands or proclamations.
However, what you seem not to recognise is that any person has the right to
suggest or campaign for such a change, regardless of their age, experience
level, pay grade, nerdiness or severity of OCD. To imply otherwise is
offensive.
The purpose both of debating suggestions on this list and carrying out the
RFC
process is to determine if the internals community can reach a consensus
on a
proposal's viability for inclusion in PHP.
Only if and when consensus is achieved will the change be implemented.
There are
no unilateral decisions. To imply otherwise is to fundamentally
misunderstand
how open-source collaboration works.
Furthermore, there is absolutely no prerequisite that a standard must have
been
in place since the project's inception for a proposal to be valid.
If there was never a standard to begin with then there should be proper
justification for introducing one now, and I'm afraid that "to be
consistent" is not a valid argument. What problems are caused by this
inconsistency? What is the cost, both in core developer time and application
developer time, to change it? If the benefits are smaller than the costs
then can the change actually be justified?
None of what I have written above should be news to you, and Rowan has
already
clarified that you are not being forced or even asked to change any of
your own
code. So why do you persist?
Because I have been using PHP since 2002, and have been following this group
shortly after, and there is one pattern I have seen over and over again.
After a change has been made in PHP core to enforce a "standard" for nothing
more than "to be consistent", some bright spark will try to enforce it on
the greater PHP community. After all, it is the "standard" right? Why should
there be one standard for the core developers and another standard for the
application developers? Sure that's inconsistent, and as such it must be a
"bad thing".
I disapprove of any change to the language which is purely cosmetic and not
an improvement in functionality. The words that I use to express my
disapproval are an indicator of my level of disapproval. When I describe the
supporters of this RFC as nit-picking, anal-retentive OCD sufferers you may
regard that as derogatory but it is far from being abusive. I am simply
pointing out that supporters of this RFC are spending too much time on
irrelevant and trivial details which will not improve the language in any
way whatsoever.
My words may annoy you, but I am just as annoyed at RFCs like this one.
--
Tony Marston
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
