Hi!
> I disagree that (as I take away from your last sentence) the current
> approach is better because it means people feel they have been properly
> heard. I can think of recent messages on the list from people saying
> that they don't feel heard.
I'm not saying we have perfect record in
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 4:31 PM Peter Bowyer
wrote:
> Hi Stas,
>
> Thanks for replying!
>
> On Sun, 11 Aug 2019 at 04:26, Stanislav Malyshev
> wrote:
>
> > The risk here however is for the document to be seen as a means to
> > "argue less" by way of excluding certain points of view from
Hi Stas,
Thanks for replying!
On Sun, 11 Aug 2019 at 04:26, Stanislav Malyshev
wrote:
> The risk here however is for the document to be seen as a means to
> "argue less" by way of excluding certain points of view from discussion.
> That would not be a good thing. This is the main concern for
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 2:56 PM Arnold Daniels
wrote:
> I've added a list of concerns to the FAQ. These are both taken from the
> discussion as well as concerns I have myself.
>
Along the lines of the 'counterpoint' to short tags, I moved the concerns
into a separate page here:
On 8/12/2019 2:06 AM, Benjamin Eberlei wrote:
What would be the plan to boost or change the reputation? How are you going
to find P++ in Google? How are users searching for things with PHP and P++?
What's the documentation going to look like for two languages that share so
much? Specifically
I've added a list of concerns to the FAQ. These are both taken from the
discussion as well as concerns I have myself.
https://wiki.php.net/pplusplus/faq#what_are_the_general_concerns
Arnold
[Arnold Daniels - Chat @
Spike](https://www.spikenow.com/?ref=spike-organic-signature&_ts=43s7s)
On 12.08.19 г. 12:06 ч., Benjamin Eberlei wrote:
On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 6:32 AM Andi Gutmans wrote:
I must admit that the first time I read Zeev’s email I got anxious... but
it is frustrating that PHP has a WAY better runtime than Python and most
other dynamic languages yet is falling out of
On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 6:32 AM Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I must admit that the first time I read Zeev’s email I got anxious... but
> it is frustrating that PHP has a WAY better runtime than Python and most
> other dynamic languages yet is falling out of fashion. It’s strange given
> how much better
On Sun, 11 Aug 2019 at 05:32, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I must admit that the first time I read Zeev’s email I got anxious... but
> it is frustrating that PHP has a WAY better runtime than Python and most
> other dynamic languages yet is falling out of fashion.
In the case of Python, it seems to
+1
On Sun, 11 Aug 2019, 07:32 Andi Gutmans, wrote:
> I must admit that the first time I read Zeev’s email I got anxious... but
> it is frustrating that PHP has a WAY better runtime than Python and most
> other dynamic languages yet is falling out of fashion. It’s strange given
> how much better
I must admit that the first time I read Zeev’s email I got anxious... but it is
frustrating that PHP has a WAY better runtime than Python and most other
dynamic languages yet is falling out of fashion. It’s strange given how much
better it actually runs (really being unbiased here). One reason
Hi!
> I started for the same reason: to help the community pull together and
> argue less, by having a codified set of values.
The risk here however is for the document to be seen as a means to
"argue less" by way of excluding certain points of view from discussion.
That would not be a good
Hi!
> Finally, Zeev, you mention the "PHP philosophy" of being a dynamic
> language. While that may well be your philosophy, and you have every
> right to have it, that has not been the "PHP philosophy" for years,
> as seen by all of the type "stuff" that's been successfully added to
> the
[List etiquette question: is it good form here to change the subject line
when starting a tangential discussion?]
On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 00:08, Larry Garfield wrote:
> PHP doesn't have a coherent philosophy. It is proudly directionless,
> steered by whoever happens to be writing code this
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 7:08 PM Larry Garfield
wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019, at 2:54 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> > During the discussion of the P++ proposal (
> > https://externals.io/message/106453), it became painfully clear that
> this
> > idea did little, so far, to bring peace to the galaxy.
>
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019, at 2:54 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> During the discussion of the P++ proposal (
> https://externals.io/message/106453), it became painfully clear that this
> idea did little, so far, to bring peace to the galaxy.
>
> However, based on a lot of the feedback, both on internals@
On 10 Aug 2019, at 1:51, Sara Golemon mailto:poll...@php.net>>
wrote:
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 4:58 PM Zeev Suraski mailto:z...@php.net>>
wrote:
As Bob pointed out I'm rusty, but I do think that we can solve the short
tags issue in this way. At the lexer level, if we see the tag, we
set
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 4:58 PM Zeev Suraski wrote:
> As Bob pointed out I'm rusty, but I do think that we can solve the short
> tags issue in this way. At the lexer level, if we see the tag, we
> set short tags to off for the scope of the file before moving forward. But
> more importantly,
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 4:30 PM Mark Randall wrote:
> On 09/08/2019 22:02, Sara Golemon wrote:
> > 2. Strict(er) typing - I'm not sure, on the surface, what future
> expansions
> > we'd plan for in this area which couldn't fit into standard PHP in a non
> > BC-breaking way.
>
> Union types and
On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 12:03 AM Sara Golemon wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 2:54 PM Zeev Suraski wrote:
>
> > It's available here: https://wiki.php.net/pplusplus/faq
> >
> >
> It's possible I missed something while on holiday. There are certainly a
> lot of messages to page through. I dig
I do completely agree with this and would like to be part of it. I am
really frustrated to see old developers shrug every time I talk about php.
I am enthusiastic about our language, the language I started coding with
and the language that evolved in years while I was learning it.
2 years ago,
On 09/08/2019 22:02, Sara Golemon wrote:
2. Strict(er) typing - I'm not sure, on the surface, what future expansions
we'd plan for in this area which couldn't fit into standard PHP in a non
BC-breaking way.
Union types and general reflection do spring to mind on this. I assume
any APIs using
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 2:54 PM Zeev Suraski wrote:
> It's available here: https://wiki.php.net/pplusplus/faq
>
>
It's possible I missed something while on holiday. There are certainly a
lot of messages to page through. I dig the idea of resolving this
tug-of-war between progress and BC, but
23 matches
Mail list logo
