> On 13 Sep 2019, at 00:41, Chase Peeler <chasepee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 1:33 PM Matthew Brown <matthewmatt...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> What if Java suddenly said that all properties are suddenly private, and
>>> can only be accessed through getter/setter methods?
>>> 
>> 
>> If Java announced that the next major version was to make the change after
>> 95% of userland developers favoured it and over 2/3rds of their internals
>> team did, I'd think "huh ok I guess they have good reasons".
>> 
>> For 20 years people have developed code based on that feature. It was
>>> never considered an error, and often not even considered bad practice
>> 
>> 
>> You seem to be arguing against *ever* changing something that a majority
>> once thought was good, and fundamental to a given system. Lots of things
>> fall into that category - restricting voting to men, segregation, etc.
>> 
> 
> Now you're just being silly. I actually don't have a problem with
> fundamental language change, provided that the positives that are gained
> far outweigh the negatives of the BC break and there is no other way to
> accomplish those positives without such a BC break.
> 
> There are a myriad of ways to achieve what the RFC attempts to achieve.
> Whether that's analysis tools, custom error handlers, detailed code
> reviews, etc. Nothing prevents anyone from initializing all of their
> variables or performing as many sanity checks on a variable before
> accessing it as they want to. Nothing in the RFC is required to implement
> other new functionality like enums, union types, variable typing, etc.
> 
> I also think it's a bit of a stretch to compare something like variable
> initialization with things that denied people their basic human rights.
> 
> -- 
> Chase Peeler
> chasepee...@gmail.com


Please, will someone arguing against making use of undefined variables a higher 
severity, explain to me why the same argument was not made for use of undefined 
constants, for which the RFC to deprecate/remove support, passed 41:0.

How is one undefined symbol more acceptable than another undefined symbol?
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to