On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 1:58 PM Olumide Samson <oludons...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 6:54 PM Chase Peeler <chasepee...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 1:33 PM Matthew Brown <matthewmatt...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > What if Java suddenly said that all properties are suddenly private, and >> >> can only be accessed through getter/setter methods? >> >> >> > >> > If Java announced that the next major version was to make the change >> after >> > 95% of userland developers favoured it and over 2/3rds of their >> internals >> > team did, I'd think "huh ok I guess they have good reasons". >> > >> > >> I call shenanigans on that 95% number. Can you please back that up? >> Personally, I don't think it's even possible to gauge userland >> support because the vast majority of userland developers aren't involved >> in >> the community at all. Those people don't even know this is being >> discussed, >> and probably won't until they start looking to upgrade to PHP 8. >> >> I'm sure you need to read the message properly before replying, he ain't > talking about PHP there... > > Even 95% can be called anything(of users who are involved in the > community, who knows, who are actual users, etc) > >> >> No, I think you misunderstood. I said "What if Java did XYZ" - The reply was "If 95% of userland Java developers supported such a change..." That implies that 95% of userland PHP developers support the changes in the RFC. It wouldn't make sense to say "Well, if 95% of Java userland developers supported the change, then it would make sense, just like we should pass this RFC that 45% of PHP userland developers support" > > For 20 years people have developed code based on that feature. It was >> >> never considered an error, and often not even considered bad practice >> > >> > >> > You seem to be arguing against *ever* changing something that a majority >> > once thought was good, and fundamental to a given system. Lots of things >> > fall into that category - restricting voting to men, segregation, etc. >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Chase Peeler >> chasepee...@gmail.com >> > -- Chase Peeler chasepee...@gmail.com
