On 6 June 2017 12:27:16 BST, "li...@rhsoft.net" <li...@rhsoft.net> wrote: >looking at the code quality (style, readability, robustness, >error-handling) of 99% of php userland code out there - which is >horrible to say it nice - even if all that is true i still doubt that >it improves quality in the long term, sometimes it's better working >things are not maintained then badly maintained
There is no reason to assume either that we would attract the worst possible PHP programmers, or that we currently attract the best possible C programmers. Indeed, it's likely that a lot of existing extensions have poor style, lack of robustness, etc, because they were written by people "speaking a second language", i.e. PHP programmers trying their hand at C. I'm not even sure your last sentence is true very often - changes to the core require changes to extensions, so either the entire core stagnates (in fear of breaking things) or extensions get abandoned (because rather than working but unmaintained, they are now broken and unmaintained). There are certainly details to be worked out, but I think the principle of making it easier to build and maintain a rich core library is a very good one. Regards, -- Rowan Collins [IMSoP] -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
