Hi all,
I'd like to restart the discussion for the strict_opterators RFC (
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/strict_operators).
A number of changes have been made to the RFC since the last discussion.
These are aimed at limiting the situations where `strict_operators` will
change the behavior rather than
Hi!
> Would someone mind responding to the original poster on the general
> mailing list to let them know that their legal department can rest
> assured that the PHP license is OSI-approved.
>
> The OSI website might not be up-to-date yet, so you can point them to
> the following mailing list
Hi internals,
I think it's just as good to write:
if ($condition) return $retval;
Yes, there are subtle semantic differences the new syntax would emphasize, but
it doesn't feel like it justifies it. New syntax also means the need to support
it, for IDEs and other tools, static analysis tools,
> On May 8, 2020, at 17:08, Ben Ramsey wrote:
>
>> On Mar 5, 2020, at 08:13, Ben Ramsey wrote:
>>
>>
>> I’ve submitted a formal request for “legacy approval” to the OSI
>> license-review list, according to their policies.
>>
>>
Hello,
Not it's not and will likely never be so using `guard` is a really bad idea.
Best regaeds,
Benas Seliuginas
Benas,
> On May 15, 2020, at 04:33, Benas IML wrote:
>
> Hey,
>
> `guard` would be a keyword this means that all of the classes, interfaces and
> traits named Guard would be illegal. Therefore Laravel's `Guard` interface
> would be incompatible with PHP 8 which in turn means thousands of web
On Thu, 14 May 2020 at 19:14, Jakob Givoni wrote:
>
> Hi Internals,
>
Hi Jakob,
Obviously, all of the following is my own personal opinion, and other
people may have different opinions.
There are two main lessons learnt from the SPL experience.
i) Some APIs need to evolve separately from the
Hi, Internals,
En lun, 11 may 2020 11:34:22 +0200 Nikita Popov
escribió
>
> I'm finding it hard to follow what is actually being proposed here at this
> point (as many different ideas seems to be discussed at the same time).
> I've granted you RFC karma on the wiki in case you
Update: I confused myself reading the RFC, sorry! Everything is alright in
the examples.
>
Hello,
Thank you for your RFC. It seems that your Attribute examples are not
promoted. I suppose that shouldn't be the case?
Best regards,
Benas Seliuginas
Hey,
`guard` would be a keyword this means that all of the classes, interfaces
and traits named Guard would be illegal. Therefore Laravel's `Guard`
interface would be incompatible with PHP 8 which in turn means thousands of
web applications would be too.
Best regards,
Benas Seliuginas
Hi internals,
I have opened voting on https://wiki.php.net/rfc/constructor_promotion.
Voting will close 2020-05-29.
Regards,
Nikita
On 15.05.2020 at 09:55, Pavel Patapau wrote:
> Hello internals,
>
> Please, provide RFC karma for creating proposal "Guard statement"
> https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/5578.
>
> account: alherd
Done. Best of luck with the RFC! :)
--
Christoph M. Becker
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime
Hello internals,
Please, provide RFC karma for creating proposal "Guard statement"
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/5578.
account: alherd
--
Pavel Patapau
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
15 matches
Mail list logo
