Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:123066 X-Original-To: internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: internals@lists.php.net Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (php-smtp4.php.net [45.112.84.5]) by qa.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C9631A009C for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 18:49:19 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=php.net; s=mail; t=1712688590; bh=1to6C30RSRVWodax6k9tddLOXX8Hxe8DQ99ANRRBX7k=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=Rk7V/71Ke+rm/fCtZIGgGPYOCS8astklx4Bulityygcxn6tr7Vl9N33wJBxQQ95vl i+wHPFxzv+bF0+uxmDeXNgG3nEzs92LpdKJZtlheCG6wjn1yfdVZDp/MWLi9RhUwt+ z7AJwhBY/LnDUSXjVd6V7csjka0hNLodfHfTpplwt5ip3v0exmi9W25yxTSZ9KBges /q2MHLxq/WKRLYceFCaU46bzdM3BKWX6pgUj5M7abGLw2xeTw2IfFm1ZG2ca3kweNZ 7G1pk2zmNvmSuQ8a9ddRBYpgcHoILHJWvrUP56ixLVPMz+nadp8EbNQ4sVpYBFFQDo jOnISph0+O6Qg== Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E445D180072 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 18:49:49 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,DMARC_PASS,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from chrono.xqk7.com (chrono.xqk7.com [176.9.45.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 18:49:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bastelstu.be; s=mail20171119; t=1712688556; bh=3UnJN/BNojOCsq2nQGv0jH9fpW9So9GMOB7gn3BnJU4=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:from:to:cc:subject:message-id; b=X38t9vBWTDB+SM/2qZk1cp0aeEFIPvlwOlEZztb1oU2euN1BN44UwX6bjYxBWnXir a/tJUag35eY/gLUBjSb6jGgn9lVK1oIc75dxkFCOAZtzw0TrDb0liaaoFtdpWenoGX DwBM+oyC23R/MmCGMYIkmS+01+OORGCw/K4/yhguWaZ7t/EEb5zDpFvdIdSYyVdRk6 42SI6WvQvcsRzMf8FwZNZTFDHlA2P1eSVFwuw7CQVVAgv8uf9hw+9ZFx59YXTATZRU kD7CXUmL2qp5MohrcKExNmndqLe44FDecVt5DRXcZ9NZ95OKUpdLZ+XprHqZzDEKuR DEmtOWgVNvWYA== Message-ID: <98e94b8b-8227-4f1c-a40c-33cf52535b8e@bastelstu.be> Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 20:49:15 +0200 Precedence: bulk list-help: list-post: List-Id: internals.lists.php.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC idea: using the void type to control maximum arity of user-defined functions To: Pablo Rauzy , internals@lists.php.net References: <6299b649-c19b-4172-9632-2ef0a55d256d@uzy.me> <7B32AF65-CA40-40F5-BA59-CB5180EC4D7F@gmail.com> <8f71d807-78e6-49f6-acc7-b1fc09d815ba@uzy.me> <989e3e13-48ee-4970-8485-f79bb70ad37c@bastelstu.be> Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: tim@bastelstu.be (=?UTF-8?Q?Tim_D=C3=BCsterhus?=) Hi On 4/8/24 14:00, Pablo Rauzy wrote: > So what should be done to move forward with this? > > Should the old RFC on strict argument count be revived? > > Or should a new RFC proposal be written? If so, should it contain an It should be a new "v2" RFC. The old RFC already contains a vote, thus editing it would change historic votes. > approval voting (where voters can select any number of candidates), > prior to the RFC proposal vote itself, to decide if the change should > be: strict argument count, using the void keyword to explicitely stop > the argument list, or using a #[Nonvariadic] attribute? > And RFC needs a clear primary vote. I believe the options you mentioned are too different to usefully be voted on with a single primary vote + a "tie breaker". I believe it should be a simple opinionated RFC. Should it not pass, follow-up RFCs for the alternative options can be proposed if it is desired. Best regards Tim Düsterhus