> On Mar 17, 2025, at 7:13 PM, Bilge wrote:
>
> On 17/03/2025 14:35, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have to inform, that I'm leaving Zend in two weeks.
>> Therefore I'm starting to think about a new job.
>> In case some company is interested in my competence, let's start from a
>> perso
On Sun, Mar 16, 2025, at 4:24 AM, Edmond Dantes wrote:
> Good day, everyone. I hope you're doing well.
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/true_async
>
> Here is a new version of the RFC dedicated to asynchrony.
>
> Key differences from the previous version:
>
> * The RFC is not based on Fiber; it introdu
Hey,
On 17.3.2025 19:58:39, Rob Landers wrote:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025, at 19:05, Bob Weinand wrote:
. The idea that extending the parent class doesnt no inherit the
child classes doesnt make sense to me.
As then if you extend a parent class and call a function of that
class which could rely on t
On Fri, 14 Mar 2025, Bilge wrote:
> On 14/03/2025 21:08, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
> > On 14/03/2025 17:37, Rob Landers wrote:
> > > What about a hybrid approach? Maybe something like `\\` that Tim
> > > suggested?
> >
> > As a perfect example of this, check out how the second paragraph is
>
On 17/03/2025 07:58, Edmond Dantes wrote:
However, I really liked the `$scope->spawn()` construct in the example
code, as it feels the most natural compared to `spawn in`.
Moreover, the `spawn in` expression is quite complex to implement, but
I don't have enough experience to evaluate it prope
Hey Rob,
On 17.3.2025 17:53:26, Rob Landers wrote:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025, at 16:30, fennic log wrote:
2. As with any syntax change and new operator there needs to be very
careful consideration, do we need a new operation, or could `::` if
the parent is static or `->` if the class is initialized
Hi Ignace,
1) around `Uri\UninitializedUriException` If I look at the behaviour of
> `DatetimeImmutable` in the same scenario or a Userland object instead of
> throwing an exception an error is thrown
>
> see:
>
> - https://3v4l.org/d4VrY
> - https://3v4l.org/Wn7En
>
> Shouldn't the URI feature fo
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025, at 19:05, Bob Weinand wrote:
> Hey Rob,
>
> On 17.3.2025 17:53:26, Rob Landers wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 17, 2025, at 16:30, fennic log wrote:
>>> 2. As with any syntax change and new operator there needs to be very
>>> careful consideration, do we need a new operation, or cou
On 17 March 2025 18:05:49 GMT, Bob Weinand wrote:
>I have not grasped any single argument in favour of \, except "other languages
>are doing it too", "existing tooling splitting on backslash would continue to
>work" and "we could use the existing use statement as is".
This wording feels a bi
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025, at 12:29, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
> On 17/03/2025 10:37, Alexandru Pătrănescu wrote:
>>> From what I understand of the proposal, the calling code won't know
>>> anything different based on it being "nested" or "namespaced", it will just
>>> see a class with a long nam
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025, at 16:30, fennic log wrote:
>
> On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 at 23:14, Rob Landers wrote:
>> __
>> Hello PHP Internals,
>>
>> I'd like to introduce my RFC for discussion:
>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/short-and-inner-classes
>>
>> This RFC defines a short class syntax as well as the
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 7:15 PM Bilge wrote:
> On 17/03/2025 14:35, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have to inform, that I'm leaving Zend in two weeks.
> > Therefore I'm starting to think about a new job.
> > In case some company is interested in my competence, let's start from
> > a perso
On 17/03/2025 14:35, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
Hi,
I have to inform, that I'm leaving Zend in two weeks.
Therefore I'm starting to think about a new job.
In case some company is interested in my competence, let's start from
a personal email communication.
Thanks. Dmitry.
RIP PHP?
On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 at 23:14, Rob Landers wrote:
> Hello PHP Internals,
>
> I'd like to introduce my RFC for discussion:
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/short-and-inner-classes
>
> This RFC defines a short class syntax as well as the ability to nest
> classes inside another class. This introduces an un
Hi,
I have to inform, that I'm leaving Zend in two weeks.
Therefore I'm starting to think about a new job.
In case some company is interested in my competence, let's start from a
personal email communication.
Thanks. Dmitry.
> Le 15 mars 2025 à 12:53, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] a écrit
> :
>
>
>
> On 14 March 2025 23:37:08 GMT, Rob Landers wrote:
>> I could get behind `::`, but I feel that it introduces human ambiguity. I
>> don't believe it would introduce compiler ambiguity, but as a human, I have
>> to hope the
On 17/03/2025 10:37, Alexandru Pătrănescu wrote:
From what I understand of the proposal, the calling code won't
know anything different based on it being "nested" or
"namespaced", it will just see a class with a long name with some
punctuation in.
The problem for me is not auto
# BoundedScope
I tried to refine the `BoundedScope` class to its logical completeness,
considering your feedback.
However, I no longer like it because it now resembles an advanced
`ComposeFuture` or `BoundedFuture` (I'm not even sure which one).
There is no doubt that such functionality is needed
On Mon, Ma0r 17, 2025 at 9:56 AM Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]
wrote:
>
>
> On 17 March 2025 07:11:23 GMT, Rob Landers wrote:
>
>
> > Which one it resolves to would depend on how you implement autoloading
>
>
> That's just the same as having the same class defined in two files on disk
> - PHP doesn't kn
Hello.
In this email, I will focus only on the syntax because it is a separate and
rather complex topic.
First, the RFC does not clearly describe the syntax, which needs to be
fixed.
Second, you are right that methods and operators cause confusion.
However, I really liked the `$scope->spawn()` co
On 17 March 2025 07:11:23 GMT, Rob Landers wrote:
>
>namespace Outer;
>
>class Inner {}
>
>And
>
>class Outer {
> class Inner {}
>}
>
>These would both resolve to the same class name for Outer\Inner.
That's the frame challenge: is that actually a good thing, because it makes the
description
On Sat, Mar 15, 2025, at 12:53, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
>
>
> On 14 March 2025 23:37:08 GMT, Rob Landers wrote:
> >I could get behind `::`, but I feel that it introduces human ambiguity. I
> >don't believe it would introduce compiler ambiguity, but as a human, I have
> >to hope the prog
22 matches
Mail list logo
