On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 10:50 AM Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2024, 11:03 PM John Coggeshall <j...@coggeshall.org> > wrote: > >> >> > I’m considering adding some C++ enhancements to the Zend API. >> >> >> I would definitely like to see an RFC for this if it was to be >> considered. To me, adding a whole new way of doing things internally >> without completely removing the old way is just asking for a more brittle, >> potentially less secure, and harder to maintain codebase. The win of making >> it easier / "nicer" on a subset of developers who might prefer a C++ >> interface isn't anywhere near worth the risk IMO. >> > > > if anything, I would rather go with rust (zig would have my preference > ;-). The benefits would be to have a significant ease to contribute for > many. > > Neither of c++ or rust would be easy to add. The later would have the huge > advantage to bring a little bit more safety to the extensions APIs. > > A less diplomatic answer would be that c++ makes zero sense in 2024 for > php (or any other language), a strong and bold take :) > > best, > Pierre > Lol it's been a long morning, thanks for the laugh. Look through php's source code, do you see any mention of rust or zig? or any references to their compilers? PHP already supports C++20 ( https://github.com/php/php-src/blob/master/build/php_cxx_compile_stdcxx.m4) and has at least one extension implemented in c++. Do you genuinely believe that it makes more sense to add support for a new language (rust/zig) that will require its own compiler (that isn't installed anywhere by default), than to improve support for a language already part of php? Humor me and elaborate on why you think that 'c++ makes zero sense in 2024 for php (or any other language),' Cheers, Lanre.
