Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

2011/11/10 Pierre Joye : > On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Patrick ALLAERT >> Some are blocking because they kinda feel forced if this is introduced. >> Ignore those, PHP wouldn't have bundled ext/mysql for the same reasons >> about 15 years ago. >> >> I guess that some voted "No" because of lack

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On 11/10/11 8:19 AM, Pierre Joye wrote: What amazes me is this exact argument. We never had, in the whole PHP history, so many leading projects agreeing on something, together and propose it to the core. I, for one, have been waiting for that to happen for years (PEAR, etc.), and now that it is

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

> 2) This isn't a "bunch" of developers, this is a bunch of the largest> used > PHP libraries in the world (ZF, Symfony, Doctrine, PPI, Drupal), Ok, I have to say it... You're a group of people who have done great things. Good for you. Get over it. Stop trying to use that as a justification or

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Comments are inline. On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: > On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Patrick ALLAERT > wrote: > >> You're mixing stuff here. >> "RFC on PSR-0 support into PHP status" != "PSR-0 status" > > I do not. But we are confusing our old vision and what users are lo

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Patrick ALLAERT wrote: > You're mixing stuff here. > "RFC on PSR-0 support into PHP status" != "PSR-0 status" I do not. But we are confusing our old vision and what users are looking for. > However, *how* PSR-0 might be introduced into PHP, for those who uses >

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Nobody's blocking anything. See the votes, that's pretty much us vs the rest. And it is not the 1st time (happened already in the past before we had the RFC process, so it will become more and more visible. >> And as far as I can see, the

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

2011/11/10 Pierre Joye : > hi Stas, > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote: >> Hi! >> >>> This attitude only makes me lose a lot of time answering questions >>> instead of focusing on actual RFC stability. I want to propose >>> something stable, I do not want to be pressured abou

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Hi! But blocking the only thing so many PHP projects have ever agreed on is a major mistake. And it is a political and religious choice (religious as in "php does not enforce standard"). Even for something that does not enforce anything if not used. Nobody's blocking anything. I don't understa

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Pierre Joye wrote: > hi Stas, > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Stas Malyshev > wrote: > > Hi! > > > >> This attitude only makes me lose a lot of time answering questions > >> instead of focusing on actual RFC stability. I want to propose > >> something stabl

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

hi Stas, On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > >> This attitude only makes me lose a lot of time answering questions >> instead of focusing on actual RFC stability. I want to propose >> something stable, I do not want to be pressured about should the RFC >> exist or not. I

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Hi! This attitude only makes me lose a lot of time answering questions instead of focusing on actual RFC stability. I want to propose something stable, I do not want to be pressured about should the RFC exist or not. It only delays the real voting results. What I can do to address this? I woul

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Hi, @RDohms What you said is pretty valid. If you're not going to use it, you vote against it? You may not use it, but many others can. It's a true state. @Anthony I already heard your points many times. I know you're against it. I also know the voting should be reset, but before the reset, I w

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 8:49 PM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Rafael Dohms > wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > > I am not PSR compliant in either autoloader implementation or class > implementation.  The reason is that over time I have

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Rafael Dohms wrote: > On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > > You sort of prove my point here, as you actually have your own > autoloader, which in case you are PSR compliant, you would not need, > you can still use your bootstrap but no longer

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > Rafael > >> This makes life as a PHP developer much easier and having the standard> >> "valued" by PHP by having a SplClassLoader that allows any library to> not >> need to implement a autolaoder if no framework is present allows> for much

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 6:55 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com < guilhermebla...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Nikita, > > Thanks. > It's your option and I won't fight. But it seems my proposal is not yet > 100%. > Some things I have either identified or people have reported. > > 1- Remove ->register() and ->

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Hi! - I think it's too late in PHP 5.4's release cycle to be proposing anything for 5.4. Not talking about the merits of the loader, if it comes into 5.4, that won't be 5.4.0. Unless we discover some very bad problem, 5.4 is going into RC tomorrow, which means I will be extremely reluctant t

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On 9 November 2011 22:44, Peter Cowburn wrote: > I am removing my vote due to a particularly annoying aspect of this > whole RFC/voting structure: the RFC is still in flux! This is one of the reasons why I've voted -1: there's no way an RFC should be changing this much (or at all, really) while v

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Rafael > This makes life as a PHP developer much easier and having the standard> > "valued" by PHP by having a SplClassLoader that allows any library to> not > need to implement a autolaoder if no framework is present allows> for much > nicer "plug and play" interaction of libraries, less work

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 12:04 AM, Will Fitch wrote: > ... > I have to say, I've never heard the argument, "man, if there's one > thing I'd like to standardize in PHP, it'd definitely be autoloading > classes."  No, indeed I believe this is a group of frameworks trying > to implement a standard into

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Hi guys, I am removing my vote due to a particularly annoying aspect of this whole RFC/voting structure: the RFC is still in flux! How on earth are we supposed to be able to vote yay/nay on something if that something keeps changing, or is very poorly defined? I request that the RFC itself be dis

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On 09/11/11 11:24, Christian Kaps wrote: Hi, Hi Christian :-), I'm fine with the most of the implementation. But I have some suggestions to optimize it. 1. The interface should be named SplClassLoader and the register and unregister methods should be removed. It should be possible to de

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On 08/11/11 18:39, Nikita Popov wrote: On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 6:28 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote: Because there's no need to bring to C a single foreach. Also, if you re-read the RFC, you'll see that SplClassLoader is extendable for personalized developer needs, such as an addAll or an A

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Hi, I'm fine with the most of the implementation. But I have some suggestions to optimize it. 1. The interface should be named SplClassLoader and the register and unregister methods should be removed. It should be possible to define class loader implementations without registering them as

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

2011/11/8 guilhermebla...@gmail.com : > Ok... I promised to complete the RFC and here I am. > > I wrapped the entire idea, PHP implementation of what I'm proposing all in > RFC. > If you're interested, feel free to review the document, highlight if I > missed something and update/add your votes. >

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

I don't argue with your logic and want for standards. I do question this implementation. This is will not enforce any standards whatsoever and I feel it serves the need for existing frameworks and standardizing them. I have to say, I've never heard the argument, "man, if there's one thing I'd like

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

PS: I'd love to point you all this article... this is something that motivates me to push this RFC forward. =) http://phpmaster.com/the-importance-of-standards/ Cheers, On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 11:23 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote: > For all those interested, I implemented what I referred as

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

For all those interested, I implemented what I referred as item 2: After some thought it makes sense, but only if interface then defines the setMode prototype. The background for this is supported if the user decides to enhance the base class to support caching, requiring the injection of the Cac

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Hi Nikita, Thanks. It's your option and I won't fight. But it seems my proposal is not yet 100%. Some things I have either identified or people have reported. 1- Remove ->register() and ->unregister(), and make the spl_autoload_register to support SplClassLoader. I'm really +0 on this one. But s

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 6:28 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote: > Because there's no need to bring to C a single foreach. > Also, if you re-read the RFC, you'll see that SplClassLoader is > extendable for personalized developer needs, such as an addAll or an > APC lookup. After your changes the R

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Hi Nikita, Because there's no need to bring to C a single foreach. Also, if you re-read the RFC, you'll see that SplClassLoader is extendable for personalized developer needs, such as an addAll or an APC lookup. Cheers, On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Nikita Popov wrote: > On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 a

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 6:17 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote: > Remove is useless. conditionally add loaders and you're done. > AddAll is ok for user land, but we focus on basic stuff, not fluffy > implementations. It can be easily done in userland. ... Just like the whole rest of the class: al

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Ok... I promised to complete the RFC and here I am. I wrapped the entire idea, PHP implementation of what I'm proposing all in RFC. If you're interested, feel free to review the document, highlight if I missed something and update/add your votes. http://wiki.php.net/rfc/splclassloader Answering

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On 11/07/2011 07:04 PM, Larry Garfield wrote: > If anything, the low degree of communication between "people who write > PHP" and "people who write in PHP" is, and has long been, one of PHP's > great weaknesses. I think this entire thread has shown that very well. > That is something that needs

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On 11/07/2011 01:42 PM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote: On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa< ivan.ender...@hoa-project.net> wrote: On 07/11/11 19:17, Lester Caine wrote: guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote: To participate of php-standards group, feel free to join here: http://groups.goo

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

> I updated the RFC a few hours ago based on a lengthy discussion in> > php-standards. Point of order. Discussions on RFCs are supposed to happen on the internals list. That's the point of an open RFC process, so that the discussion and justification can be made public for all to see. The RFCs

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa < ivan.ender...@hoa-project.net> wrote: > > > On 07/11/11 19:17, Lester Caine wrote: > >> guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote: >> >>> To participate of php-standards group, feel free to join here: >>> http://groups.google.com/**group/php-standards

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On 07/11/11 19:17, Lester Caine wrote: guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote: To participate of php-standards group, feel free to join here: http://groups.google.com/group/php-standards Not while it's not a php list ... +1. It would be great if PHP could host this mailing-list. It would be an ac

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote: To participate of php-standards group, feel free to join here: http://groups.google.com/group/php-standards Not while it's not a php list ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electro

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Anthony, On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: Actually, I just re-read the RFC again and I noticed something that's really irksome to me: Implementation extension According to new threads in php-standards list, it seems all derived im

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On 07/11/11 19:05, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Ivan, Hi :-), The PSR-0 went to Final Release 2 years ago. It's not possible to change it anymore. If you find relevant items, you can open another PSR for discussion. But be aware that autoloading ones would be likely rejected since we al

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Am 07.11.2011 18:36, schrieb guilhermebla...@gmail.com: > Point #4 would probably turn ClassLoader useless ... which it is in my opinion hence my request to include that option in the voting process. -- Sebastian BergmannCo-Founder and Principal Consultant http://sebastian-

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Hi Ivan, On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa wrote: > > > On 07/11/11 18:41, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> Hi Ivan, > > Hi, > >> >> I updated the RFC a few hours ago based on a lengthy discussion in >> php-standards. >> It seems after these 2 years of PSR-0, all the rules

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Hi Anthony, On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > Actually, I just re-read the RFC again and I noticed something that's > really irksome to me: > >> Implementation extension > >> According to new threads in php-standards list, it seems all derived >> implementations have inclu

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On 07/11/11 18:41, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Ivan, Hi, I updated the RFC a few hours ago based on a lengthy discussion in php-standards. It seems after these 2 years of PSR-0, all the rules are kept, but some changes were made to the original code (the one in RFC) to enhance the s

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

I don't disagree with your assessment. I would like to add that the framework standards group, in this case, should consider standardizing the frameworks rather than PHP based on their needs. There's no reason the members of your group can't reach a consensus to develop a loader that is distribute

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Actually, I just re-read the RFC again and I noticed something that's really irksome to me: > Implementation extension > According to new threads in php-standards list, it seems all derived > implementations have included these extensions to original support: > Multiple paths per namespace > Si

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Hi Ivan, I updated the RFC a few hours ago based on a lengthy discussion in php-standards. It seems after these 2 years of PSR-0, all the rules are kept, but some changes were made to the original code (the one in RFC) to enhance the support. They are: - Multiple paths per namespace - Silent mode

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Hi, It seems we would never reach some consensus, so I prefer to stick to the voting process. Looks like it's another battle between core developers and framework core developers, where the first ones don't see a benefit at all and have to opt for a side while the other side is eagerly requesting

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On 07/11/11 14:41, David Coallier wrote: Hey everyone, Hi David, After lengthy discussions and various opinion, we believe this issue has been discussed at length and the PSR-0 has had this standard effective for the past 1.5 year. The SplClassLoader RFC has moved to "voting" stage. Please ca

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Well, with respect to that, are there any examples of where PHP currently "reserves the namespace"? I can declare functions/classes for every single disablable/PECL extension right now. So is there even a method to "reserve a namespace", yet alone enforce that in core? And with respect to the re

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Anthony Ferrara wrote: Lester, I think he was referring to something like the MySQL/bcmath/etc extension where it ships in core, but is disabled by default (requires a compile-time option). I think what you interpreted it as is basically just what PECL is for and how it works? Considering that

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

I know this topic has been discussed enough, but I think one argument was not brought up yet. The proposed solution has a bad OO design because it violates against the "Single responsibility principle". Another issue is that the proposed class is only one possible solution to load PSR-0 conform

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Lester, I think he was referring to something like the MySQL/bcmath/etc extension where it ships in core, but is disabled by default (requires a compile-time option). I think what you interpreted it as is basically just what PECL is for and how it works? Considering that it would basically be ju

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Sebastian Bergmann wrote: 1- The same as you wrote. Having it in SPL and in PHP 5.4 > 2- Have it in PHP 5.4 as an external extension (FIG, PSR or PSG), > enabled by default. > 3- As an external extension, disabled by default. This would require > PHP core to reserve the namespace for us. Y

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

That would be even better On Nov 7, 2011, at 10:59 AM, Sebastian Bergmann wrote: > Am 07.11.2011 15:29, schrieb guilhermebla...@gmail.com: >> 1- The same as you wrote. Having it in SPL and in PHP 5.4 >> 2- Have it in PHP 5.4 as an external extension (FIG, PSR or PSG), >> enabled by default. >

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Am 07.11.2011 15:29, schrieb guilhermebla...@gmail.com: > 1- The same as you wrote. Having it in SPL and in PHP 5.4 > 2- Have it in PHP 5.4 as an external extension (FIG, PSR or PSG), > enabled by default. > 3- As an external extension, disabled by default. This would require > PHP core to reserve

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

On Nov 7, 2011, at 10:50 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > Well, my only concern with splitting it into the three questions is > that the RFC specifically mentioned putting it in SPL. > > So there wasn't really any discussion or RFC of either of the other > two points. While it's not really a big de

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

Well, my only concern with splitting it into the three questions is that the RFC specifically mentioned putting it in SPL. So there wasn't really any discussion or RFC of either of the other two points. While it's not really a big deal, I think that #3 at least requires some more discussion as it

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

I agree with Guilherme on this one. The voting objective seems very vague currently. On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 12:29 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com < guilhermebla...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'd rather suggest to split this poll into 3 questions: > > 1- The same as you wrote. Having it in SPL and in PHP 5

Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase

I'd rather suggest to split this poll into 3 questions: 1- The same as you wrote. Having it in SPL and in PHP 5.4 2- Have it in PHP 5.4 as an external extension (FIG, PSR or PSG), enabled by default. 3- As an external extension, disabled by default. This would require PHP core to reserve the names