On Fri, May 22, 2020, at 6:08 AM, Ilija Tovilo wrote:
> Hi internals
> 
> I'd like to announce the match expression v2 RFC:
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/match_expression_v2
> 
> The goal of the new draft is to be as simple and uncontroversial as
> possible. It differs from v1 in the following ways:
> 
> * Blocks were removed
> * Secondary votes were removed
>     * optional semicolon
>     * omitting `(true)`
> * Unimportant details were removed (e.g. examples for future scope)
> 
> You can look at the diff here:
> https://github.com/iluuu1994/match-expression-rfc/pull/8/files
> 
> I will also leave the discussion period open for longer as that too
> was one of the primary criticisms.
> 
> As mentioned by Kalle:
> 
> > Resurrecting rejected RFCs have a "cooldown" of 6 months:
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/voting#resurrecting_rejected_proposals
> 
> That is, unless:
> 
> > The author(s) make substantial changes to the proposal. While it's
> > impossible to put clear definitions on what constitutes 'substantial'
> > changes, they should be material enough so that they'll significantly
> > affect the outcome of another vote.
> 
> Given that many people have said without blocks they'd vote yes I'd
> say this is the case here. Let me know if you don't agree.
> 
> Ilija

I'd say this is a textbook example of sufficiently "substantial."

Thanks, Ilija!  This looks a lot better.

My one question is why you're not including the implicit "match (true)" in this 
version, when the secondary vote on the previous RFC was 80% in favor of it.

(And I still think the argument is stronger if you include a comparison to 
ternary assignment, but that doesn't affect implementation.)

--Larry Garfield

-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to