Hi

2015-03-15 8:33 GMT-03:00 Dan Ackroyd <dan...@basereality.com>:

> On 15 March 2015 at 06:59, Marcio Almada <marcio.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I received some requests to update the RFC with more information about BC
> > breaks + possible minor adjustments regarding dynamic function calls.
>
>
> Please can you stop abusing the RFC process?
>
> This RFC is attempting to change the language. You received the
> information about the BC breaks weeks ago, they aren't new items that
> you just heard about for the first time today.. You opened the voting
> and then closed it immediately when you realised the vote wasn't going
> to sail through.
>
>
There is no abuse. This is not true, I truly received a suggestion from Bob
Weiland and decided to consider it.
4:3 is not a sign that a voting will pass or not, it's only 7 votes and we
usually get ~52 votes during
a 14 days voting period.


> You're now making changes to the RFC and proposing to re-open voting
> on the same day. How are people meant to have time to read and think
> about the changes?
>
>
It's a **minor** change, as said before. This was the most prudent attitude.


> It's also going to be impossible for people to try the patch out, or
> to measure it for performance hit.
>
>
Performance has never been an issue with this RFC. You probably meant "bc
break" not "performance hit", and the suggested change about dynamic calls
Bob did, if accepted by, is a minor change that will actually reduce the BC
breaks not enlarge it.


> The problem this RFC fixes is not a big enough problem to justify
> making decisions about the language at the last minute, particularly
> as the last version of the RFC I read breaks a whole load of valid
> code.
>
>
A lot of people tell me the opposite. I listened to your opinion many times
and disagreed with it.
Please don't express your disagreement with the RFC by mixing it with false
accusations towards me.
There is a huge gap between both attitudes.

The disagreement is ok, but the false accusations coming from you make me
sad.


> cheers
> Dan
>

Marcio

Reply via email to