Hi internals,
Based on the discussion of "Property accessor hooks, take 2" and the
set-hook argument type - I got to wonder why we still define "no type"
as `mixed`.
As the pseudo type `mixed` exists since PHP 8.0, which is already
out-of-date, I have the feeling it would be better to force
Hi internals,
Just want to resent this note about the updated RFC as there where no
comments last time and I'm unsure if this was due to mailing list issues.
I now have updated the RFC to allow to opt-in to new behavior on PHP 8.4
and be able to opt-out to previous behavior in PHP 9.0 via new
Hello, Internals
I created an wiki for `grapheme_str_split` function.
Please see:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/grapheme_str_split
I would like to "Under Discussion" section.
Best Regards
Yuya
--
---
Yuya Hamada (tekimen)
- https://tekitoh-memdhoi.info
- https://github.com/y
> Notably, at least one of the volunteers must be a "veteran" release manager,
> meaning they have participated in at least one release of PHP in the past.
> The other may be an additional veteran, or more ideally, someone new to the
> RM role (in order to increase our supply of veteran RMs).
>
On Mar 5, 2024, at 11:37 AM, Jakub Zelenka wrote:
>
> Please put your name forward here if you wish to be considered a candidate.
> An initial TODO page has been added to the wiki and contains provisional
> dates for GA and pre-releases [2].
>
I'm putting my hat in to the ring again for 8.4 r
On Fri, Mar 8, 2024, at 12:12 AM, Hans Henrik Bergan wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 at 20:17, Larry Garfield wrote:
>>
>> A 3 way up-down vote doesn't make sense. What happens if none of the 3
>> options reaches 66%?
>>
>> The viable options here are a single RCV vote (which we've done before), or
On Fri, Mar 8, 2024, at 8:12 AM, Hans Henrik Bergan wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 at 20:17, Larry Garfield wrote:
>>
>> A 3 way up-down vote doesn't make sense. What happens if none of the 3
>> options reaches 66%?
>>
>> The viable options here are a single RCV vote (which we've done before), or
Hi folks. Based on earlier discussions, we've made a number of changes to the
RFC that should address some of the concerns people raised. We also had some
very fruitful discussions off-list with several developers from the Foundation,
which led to what we feel are some solid improvements.
htt
On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 at 20:17, Larry Garfield wrote:
>
> A 3 way up-down vote doesn't make sense. What happens if none of the 3
> options reaches 66%?
>
> The viable options here are a single RCV vote (which we've done before), or a
> single "Should we do this" vote that requires 66%, followed by
