Re: [PHP-DEV] Constraints and userland@

On 10/9/19 11:16 PM, Mike Schinkel wrote: > As a straw man proposal there could be a set number of seats (~250?), divided > up by how they are involved in PHP; corp developer, independent developer, > framework vendor, hosting company, etc. They should participate as > representatives of userlan

Re: [PHP-DEV] Internals "camps"

> I'm not sure where's the log jam here? The issue is not this specific RFC. As I wrote earlier, there appear to be heated and non-stop debates over (at least) BC, and possibly other areas. People dig in on a position and then won't consider any other options that might be available. > It's

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Deprecate Backtick Operator (V2)

Hi! > it into some kind of proxy war. Yes, "it breaks backwards compatibility for > questionable benefit" is an argument against this proposal, it is even a > *very good* argument against it, but it's also no mandate to shut down the > discussion entirely. Well, anyone is free to continue the dis

Re: [PHP-DEV] Internals "camps"

Hi! > Maybe that would be a way to move forward with some of the log jams here? I'm not sure where's the log jam here? An RFC proposing largely pointless deprecation not being met with overall enthusiasm is not a "logjam". It's a logjam only if somehow we were to imagine more BC breaks, more de

[PHP-DEV] Constraints and userland@

> On Oct 9, 2019, at 4:25 AM, Lynn wrote: > There is no middle ground in an RFC that proposes the deprecation at this > level of specifics. You either deprecate it, or you don't. The only middle > ground you can reach, is that you give it a vote to see if it should indeed > be deprecated. Perha

[PHP-DEV] Alternatives to the current dysfunction?

> On Oct 9, 2019, at 3:50 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote: > On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 0:38 Mike Schinkel > wrote: > ...it seems you have identified at least one way to seek compromise. Why not > move forward with this, in general? > I did - quite a while ago - and I see no reaso

Re: [PHP-DEV] Internals "camps"

> On Oct 9, 2019, at 12:58 PM, Larry Garfield wrote: > And developing such guidelines absolutely positively cannot happen on a > public asynchronous mailing list. I've been through such processes enough > times to know that is the worst possible way to do it. When I first saw this email I thou

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Deprecate Backtick Operator (V2)

Hello, I don't understand why people complain about PHP in term of comparison; if they like more C# or python why don't just go there? historically php is a kind of C like dialect with some perlish running thru an apache-mod giving the opportunity to break free from the CGI cumbersome world; the

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Deprecate Backtick Operator (V2)

On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 12:19 PM Olumide Samson wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019, 3:41 PM Bishop Bettini wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 5:21 PM Olumide Samson >> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019, 9:20 PM Claude Pache >>> wrote: >>> >>> > > Le 7 oct. 2019 à 22:06, Olumide Samson a >>> écri

[PHP-DEV] Internals "camps"

On Wed, Oct 9, 2019, at 2:50 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote: > As I wrote a couple of weeks back, before we agree on the principle - that > these contentious, breaking-for-no-new-reason proposals can’t be forced on > everyone but we need to make it opt-in, I don’t think formalizing it into > an RFC would

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Deprecate Backtick Operator (V2)

On Wed, Oct 9, 2019, 3:41 PM Bishop Bettini wrote: > On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 5:21 PM Olumide Samson > wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019, 9:20 PM Claude Pache wrote: >> >> > > Le 7 oct. 2019 à 22:06, Olumide Samson a >> écrit : >> > > >> > > What's the goal of PHP? >> > >> > One important goal is

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Deprecate Backtick Operator (V2)

On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 5:21 PM Olumide Samson wrote: > On Mon, Oct 7, 2019, 9:20 PM Claude Pache wrote: > > > > Le 7 oct. 2019 à 22:06, Olumide Samson a écrit > : > > > > > > What's the goal of PHP? > > > > One important goal is (like many programming languages) to get work done. > > > I disagr

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Deprecate Backtick Operator (V2)

Hi, On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 11:13 PM Mike Schinkel wrote: > If a vote is the middle ground then why the need to participate in any > discussion? > > Also, how is a vote a middle ground? A vote ensures that one sides wins > and the other side looses. IOW, a zero-sum game. > > Why does it not make

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Deprecate Backtick Operator (V2)

On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 0:38 Mike Schinkel wrote: > ...it seems you have identified at least one way to seek compromise. Why > not move forward with this, in general? > > I did - quite a while ago - and I see no reason not to, except that the pro-strict/pro-let’s-break-things camp either ignores t

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Deprecate Backtick Operator (V2)

On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 5:45 PM Mark Randall wrote: > Hi Internals, > > I put forward the following RFC "Deprecate Backtick Operator (V2)" for > discussion. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/deprecate-backtickTrying to drag every single > discussion to the meta level is exactly what is causing these un

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Deprecate Backtick Operator (V2)

On Wed, Oct 9, 2019, 12:59 AM M. W. Moe wrote: > Hello, > > the point Stanislav is really not about whom; that's about thinking, work, > effort, personal walk thru a problem; > and I am sorry he is fully right; live example: > > "I think that's been inconsistencies from the part of early contribu