Zitat von Marcio Almada <marcio.w...@gmail.com>:
Hi, As promised, the "Strict Argument Count" RFC vote was restarted: RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/strict_argcount PR: https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/1108 There was no need to update the BC break section. The only minor change was the addition of the following section: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/strict_argcount#about_callbacks_invoke_and_dynamic_calls The voting will close in exactly 14 days counting from now. This is the discussion summary so far http://markmail.org/thread/ol5s2vhw35ac2px3 Acknowledgments to Bob Weinand for offering a practical solution that will help many in case the RFC passes. Thanks, Márcio
I voted no because I see the "Flexible" Interface Implementations mentioned in the RFC a valid and common use case, and the proposed solutions not suitable.
You probably haven't found those during real code tests because it's commonly used to "migrate" or "extend" APIs. You add a new optional parameter to both the caller and callee of an API, with defensive coding so that both still work if that parameter is not available. This is done to not require new dependency versions. But you won't find those cases if you test complete software stacks, because in the most current version of both modules you will have the new parameter available.
Beside that, your testing sample was pretty small. Jan. -- Jan Schneider The Horde Project http://www.horde.org/ https://www.facebook.com/hordeproject -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
