On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 12:19 PM Olumide Samson <oludons...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019, 3:41 PM Bishop Bettini <bis...@php.net> wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 5:21 PM Olumide Samson <oludons...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019, 9:20 PM Claude Pache <claude.pa...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > > Le 7 oct. 2019 à 22:06, Olumide Samson <oludons...@gmail.com> a >>> écrit : >>> > > >>> > > What's the goal of PHP? >>> > >>> > One important goal is (like many programming languages) to get work >>> done. >>> > >>> I disagree, coz this seems to be a goal cooked up by you(even if I might >>> believe in the general idea of that goal, I still can't believe it until >>> I >>> see where it was outlined). >>> >> >> I think the PHP web-site[1] supports Claude's statement: >> >> "PHP is a popular general-purpose scripting language that is especially >> suited to web development. >> Fast, flexible and pragmatic, PHP powers everything from your blog to the >> most popular websites in the world." >> >> The adjectives used: >> >> - General-purpose >> - Fast >> - Flexible >> - Pragmatic >> >> The last one, pragmatic, applies to Claude's point. Various definitions >> of pragmatic include: >> >> - "solving problems in a sensible way that suits the conditions that >> really exist now, rather than obeying fixed theories, ideas, or rules" [2] >> - "of or relating to a practical point of view or practical >> considerations." [3] >> - "involving or emphasizing practical results rather than theories >> and ideas" [4] >> >> With respect to Mark's proposal, deprecating back-ticks: maybe it's more >> pragmatic to have a single, well-defined, and obvious way to invoke an >> external process. Sure, yet PHP isn't just "pragmatic". It's also flexible >> and general-purpose. Flexible is the opposite of rigid, meaning there are >> circumstances where a second way, or even a third way, may provide more >> practical utility than the single canonical interface. General-purpose >> means a language is useful in many ways. PHP while "especially suited for >> web-development" is also useful as an ad-hoc shell scripting language and, >> in that context, back-ticks are welcomed. >> >> If we take back-ticks away, we hobble the "quick-scripting for personal >> use" flexibility in favor of the enterprise-grade "distributed development, >> high code-reuse and review" architecture. That seems to run counter to the >> nature of PHP. >> >> [1]:https://www.php.net >> [2]:https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/pragmatic >> [3]:https://www.dictionary.com/browse/pragmatic >> [4]:https://www.macmillandictionary.com/us/dictionary/american/pragmatic >> > > That's written as "features" not "goals", you know what goal is? > > Goal is like a mission, a statement written to be taken seriously. > Checkout python.org you will see an example of what goal is, written > clearly as "mission" not "features and what it is/does". > > I rest my case. > "The main goal of the language is to allow web developers to write dynamically generated web pages quickly, but you can do much more with PHP." [1] If you're referring to the mission of the Python Software Foundation, you will not find an analogue in the PHP world. PHP does not have a steering organization like that. The PHP Group holds copyright, but exercises no sanctioned governance. "The people writing the code get to call the shots, for better or worse." [2] We are a developer confederation, each individual with their own goals who all have a passion for PHP the language, and we work as best we can together to achieve them. It'd be nice to elevate our confederation to a collective, with a steering board and clear guidance, but that's -- perhaps -- a Sisyphean task. [1]:https://www.php.net/manual/en/preface.php [2]:https://externals.io/message/107079
