Power of democracy, maturity and love(for this same project PHP), I guess. If this same love and energy could be put in place to know the directions and future PHP hold(like are we moving forward or not), that will seriously be a game changer.
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019, 2:00 PM Kris Craig <kris.cr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019, 3:20 AM Olumide Samson <hisamson...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019, 10:52 AM Peter Kokot <peterko...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > On Wed, 14 Aug 2019 at 22:41, Zeev Suraski <z...@php.net> wrote: >> > > >> > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 6:14 PM Derick Rethans <der...@php.net> >> wrote: >> > > >> > > > Hi, >> > > > >> > > > In the last week(s) there has been a lot of chat about Zeev's P++ >> idea. >> > > > Before we end up spending this project's time and energy to explore >> > this >> > > > idea further, I thought it'd be wise to see if there is enough animo >> > for >> > > > this. Hence, I've created a document in the wiki as a poll: >> > > > >> > > >> > > All, >> > > >> > > Using a humoristic tone, I'm happy that finally internals@ is so >> > unified. >> > > I almost get the feeling that you may not like the idea... >> > > >> > > On a more serious note, I'll keep the feedback on the validity of this >> > vote >> > > in just about every aspect (process, jurisdiction, anything really) to >> > > myself, and say just two things: >> > > >> > > - The P++ idea makes absolutely no sense in vacuum. The reception >> around >> > > this idea implied a decision between 'one big happy family' and 'a >> > split'. >> > > Since at this stage these are the perceived choices - I'd vote >> against it >> > > too (which I just did, why not). However, I believe it's a false >> choice. >> > > >> > > - It will absolutely make sense to discuss it when it'll start >> becoming >> > > clearer to everyone that 'one big happy family' is really not an >> option. >> > > We'd be choosing how to soft split the family - granularly (2^n >> > dialects), >> > > into many editions (n dialects), or into two separate dialects with >> > clearer >> > > mandates (2 dialects). I get it that it's intangible for many of us >> > > (myself included, to a degree), which is why this idea is perceived as >> > the >> > > 'evil splitter' for everyone to unite and rally against. Maybe I'm >> > wrong, >> > > and the changes/features that I think are about to make it into PHP >> > aren't >> > > going to require any sort of split. If that's the case - it's indeed >> a >> > > horrible idea. We'd only be able to see that a but further down the >> > road. >> > > It's definitely too early to spend that level of energy on it at this >> > stage >> > > - but at the same time, it will definitely make sense to explore it >> if & >> > > when the reality I think we're going to be facing would begin to >> unfold. >> > > >> > > I will not be responding to any further emails on this thread; I'll >> > > happily reply to private messages though. >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > >> > > Zeev >> > >> > Hello @everyone, >> > >> > this then also means that PHP will now never be a consistent language >> > and short tags will be forever in so we will all be able to support >> > Chase's gigantic legacy project forever? >> > >> >> Solution would be if we can make this issue that was mentioned: >> > - elephpant vs elep++ant >> > >> > into a similar issue as is now: >> > - elephpant vs elephpantwithstricttypes >> > (non existent issue - all part of the one PHP itself) >> > >> >> Zeev(Or anyone with such energy) can take up the game with same energy >> he(Zeev) took the *elep++ant *up and I bet everyone (or the majority) >> would >> really love the newer idea(elephpant vs elephpantwithstricttypes) and >> probably take it up as a non issue coz it is all in the same part of the >> one PHP itself(which already have its niche and brand). >> >> And, IMHO the strict type or cleaner version of PHP would improve many >> sections of the language and even help with future implementations(maybe >> sooner we might even implement more evolved and consistent aliases of >> current C styled function naming) all of these and more in the same PHP >> we've known. >> >> Or perhaps, an idea is to take a break on new implementations and make >> some >> great changes which will pave way for great ideas and innovations. >> >> All of this are good ideas internals@ should be debating, I guess. >> > > Current vote is 39 - 0 in favor of rejection. Who would've guessed this > discussion would wind up being an exercise in unity lol.... > >
