200
> From: pierre@gmail.com
> To: der...@php.net
> CC: smalys...@sugarcrm.com; glo...@nebm.ist.utl.pt; internals@lists.php.net;
> nikita@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [VOTE] Generators
>
> hi Derick,
>
> On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Derick Rethans wrote
hi Derick,
On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Sep 2012, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>
>> > illegal state was written on the RFC when voting opened, and the RFC
>> > was accepted almost unanimously. As the proposal was accepted as
>> > such, I saw no valid reason not to mer
On Sat, 1 Sep 2012, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> > illegal state was written on the RFC when voting opened, and the RFC
> > was accepted almost unanimously. As the proposal was accepted as
> > such, I saw no valid reason not to merge. In fact, changing the
> > proposal after it was voted on would be
Hi!
> illegal state was written on the RFC when voting opened, and the RFC was
> accepted almost unanimously. As the proposal was accepted as such, I saw
> no valid reason not to merge. In fact, changing the proposal after it was
> voted on would be much more objectionable.
I definitely did
On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 18:02:40 +0200, Nikita Popov
wrote:
The vote ended with 24 in favor and one against. As such the RFC is
accepted.
I've merged Nikita's branch in 53351d0.
As to the "exception objection": the behavior of throwing exceptions on
illegal state was written on the RFC wh
- Original message -
> On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Nikita Popov
> wrote:
> > Hi internals!
> >
> > I think the generators RFC has been discussed thoroughly enough by
> > now, so I opened the vote:
> >
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/generators#vote
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nikita
>
> The
