Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE][RFC] PHP 5.7
Hi! I’m going to put the PHP 5.7 RFC to a vote, since it’d been 2 weeks. I’m not entirely certain myself whether it’s a good idea, but I’d like it for us to vote on it so we can settle the matter. If people vote against 5.7, a new RFC proposing an alternative could always be made by someone. I still haven't achieved a proper understanding of what 5.7 would actually include (so far the only real BC thing mentioned that it can warn about is the switch thing, and IMHO making the new minor just because of that makes little sense, of course I'm not counting non-accepted RFCs since otherwise there's like 40 of them), so I intend to vote no, but if somebody really sees something substantial that I missed, please point me out, as I am not opposed to the idea of 5.7 just don't see any practical content for it for now. -- Stas Malyshev smalys...@gmail.com -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Bugfest
On 29 December 2014 at 07:59, Stanislav Malyshev smalys...@gmail.com wrote: We definitely need somebody triaging old bugs. The problem is it requires a real lot of time, and is mind-numbingly boring, so not many people do it. Many bugs are low quality - missing data, not having good descriptions, etc. - or This would not require anything but basic knowledge of PHP and lots of time. If somebody wants to do it, arguably millions of people would benefit from it - since it would make real bus more prominent, thus making PHP devs more likely to fix them, thus improving PHP which is used by millions :) - so it is a great way to contribute. Any takers? I'd be willing to spend some time on this. Presumably I'd need some authorised access to the bug tracker?
Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE][RFC] PHP 5.7
On 12/30/2014 2:26 AM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: I still haven't achieved a proper understanding of what 5.7 would actually include (so far the only real BC thing mentioned that it can warn about is the switch thing, and IMHO making the new minor just because of that makes little sense, of course I'm not counting non-accepted RFCs since otherwise there's like 40 of them), so I intend to vote no, but if somebody really sees something substantial that I missed, please point me out, as I am not opposed to the idea of 5.7 just don't see any practical content for it for now. Would the unassociation or deprecation-for-unassociation of the ternary '?' (discussed in another thread [1]) be appropriate for the 5.7? Kris Craig mentioned he would write up an RFC for this when he has a chance. [1] http://grokbase.com/t/php/php-internals/14cdp789nk/fix-incorrect-ternary-associativity-for-7-0 thanks, Leon -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE][RFC] PHP 5.7
Hey Stas, On 30 Dec 2014, at 08:26, Stanislav Malyshev smalys...@gmail.com wrote: I still haven't achieved a proper understanding of what 5.7 would actually include (so far the only real BC thing mentioned that it can warn about is the switch thing, and IMHO making the new minor just because of that makes little sense, of course I'm not counting non-accepted RFCs since otherwise there's like 40 of them), so I intend to vote no, but if somebody really sees something substantial that I missed, please point me out, as I am not opposed to the idea of 5.7 just don't see any practical content for it for now. Basically, it would include everything that the latest 5.6.x release had at the time it was finalised, plus deprecation notices and new reserved words (if any). That would be it. If that doesn’t seem worth it to you, I won’t stop you voting against it. :) Thanks. -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE][RFC] PHP 5.7
Hey Leon, On 30 Dec 2014, at 19:14, Leon Sorokin leeon...@gmail.com wrote: Would the unassociation or deprecation-for-unassociation of the ternary '?' (discussed in another thread [1]) be appropriate for the 5.7? Kris Craig mentioned he would write up an RFC for this when he has a chance. I don’t think we could make it non-associative in 5.7, since that would be a backwards-compatibility break. We could perhaps add a warning though, if possible. Thanks! -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE][RFC] PHP 5.7
On Dec 30, 2014, at 12:26 AM, Stanislav Malyshev smalys...@gmail.com wrote: Hi! I’m going to put the PHP 5.7 RFC to a vote, since it’d been 2 weeks. I’m not entirely certain myself whether it’s a good idea, but I’d like it for us to vote on it so we can settle the matter. If people vote against 5.7, a new RFC proposing an alternative could always be made by someone. I still haven't achieved a proper understanding of what 5.7 would actually include (so far the only real BC thing mentioned that it can warn about is the switch thing, and IMHO making the new minor just because of that makes little sense, of course I'm not counting non-accepted RFCs since otherwise there's like 40 of them), so I intend to vote no, but if somebody really sees something substantial that I missed, please point me out, as I am not opposed to the idea of 5.7 just don't see any practical content for it for now. My take is that anything that takes away efforts from getting PHP 7 to market faster is a distraction. PHP.net needs to continue to show leadership in evolving the runtime. We have a pretty great jewel in our hands. Some very good RFCs that are going to make it in. Postponing PHP 7 (which this would as we have a finite amount of resources on this list) would not be good for our users. Andi P.S. - Not interested in debating it. Definitely accept folks can have other views. Just wanted to state my opinion clearly :) -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE][RFC] PHP 5.7
Hi Andi, On 30 Dec 2014, at 21:43, Andi Gutmans a...@zend.com wrote: My take is that anything that takes away efforts from getting PHP 7 to market faster is a distraction. PHP.net needs to continue to show leadership in evolving the runtime. We have a pretty great jewel in our hands. Some very good RFCs that are going to make it in. Postponing PHP 7 (which this would as we have a finite amount of resources on this list) would not be good for our users. I too want to see PHP 7 as soon as possible, and I too want some great RFCs to get in. (I’m really hoping I can get my bigint RFC in, particularly, given I’ve put so much effort into it. Though there’s a good chance it won’t get in due to time constraints.) However, I don’t think 5.7 would consume much effort or be much of a distraction. Bear in mind that the changeset from 5.6 would be trivial at best, as it would contain zero new features. In fact, this is mandated by the RFC, which specifically prohibits new features. The only time it would really require any more effort is after 5.6’s bug fix support ends, as 5.7 would have normal bug fixes for another year. So, while I understand your concern, I don’t think it would have any effect on PHP 7’s release date. Thanks! -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
