Also follow the discussion here

https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/2137#issuecomment-249353056

On Sep 23, 2016 12:38 PM, "Pierre Joye" <pierre....@gmail.com> wrote:

> Adding the RMs.
>
> Dacey, I think this needs a deeper look and decision.
>
> On Sep 22, 2016 7:51 AM, "Pierre Joye" <pierre....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sep 22, 2016 1:07 AM, "Levi Morrison" <le...@php.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:13 AM, Nicolas Grekas
> > > <nicolas.gre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> To handle this in code written around current __toString seems
> pretty
> > > > simple
> > > >
> > > > Yes it is, but that's not what we're talking about:
> > > > BC is about having perfectly fine code working in e.g. 7.0 be still
> working
> > > > fine on 7.1 *without any change*.
> > > >
> > > > Right now, we have red test suites on php7.1rc2.
> > > > This is the symptom of a BC break, by definition.
> > > > And the issue is not the existing code we have, but the new one that
> is
> > > > changing the behavior of the engine.
> > >
> > > This was understood when the decision was made. You seem to not be
> > > understanding the bigger issue and instead focusing on the BC break
> > > for a *single minor release,
> >
> > Which does not allow BC breaks but for extreme cases. I do not consider
> this case as extreme, at all.
> >
> > I share Nicolas concerns here. This is the kind of changes making the
> migration path harder than it should without a strong reason behind it.
> >
> > I agree with Nikita but it is something that can be solved using the
> depreciation flag and then handle in the next major.
> >
> > > and a dot zero at that*. If we keep the
> > > BC compat this method is redundant and useless forever. If we fix it
> > > we break your code for *one single minor release, and a dot zero at
> > > that*. Which is the bigger disruption?
> >
> > Obviously the sooner. And what is the next BC breaks for 7.2/3/4?
> >
> > This is exactly why we introduce the no BC break rule.
> >
> > In this case it is even more clear as one can use getName if desired to
> support 7.1+ only, which I suppose is most likely not the case for a large
> majority of users.
>

Reply via email to