Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:104187
Return-Path: <php@dennis.birkholz.biz>
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 73996 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2019 18:30:10 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mail01.nexxes.net) (144.76.185.252)
  by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 5 Feb 2019 18:30:10 -0000
Received: from [192.168.0.193] (unknown [93.159.255.203])
	(Authenticated sender: db220660-p0g-1)
	by mail01.nexxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 59F1086056D;
	Tue,  5 Feb 2019 16:11:19 +0100 (CET)
To: Joe Watkins <krakjoe@php.net>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <CAL=_i_=KCzMg63OPSGfjnb5m2sjK-5XTuCfokGMBwP-RBFH5Ag@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2fed98af-3831-1a1c-def8-04793fcc0c6f@birkholz.biz>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 16:10:57 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAL=_i_=KCzMg63OPSGfjnb5m2sjK-5XTuCfokGMBwP-RBFH5Ag@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC Weakrefs
From: php@dennis.birkholz.biz (Dennis Birkholz)

Hi Joe,

On 02.02.19 09:35, Joe Watkins wrote:
> Some time ago I brought this up for discussion, and last night was reminded
> of it's existence, and so this morning rebased and reworked the patch a
> little based on the feedback I got back then.
> 
> Since it was long ago, and there's no particular rush, I don't intend to
> open voting until the current policy adjustment RFC's are resolved, but
> wanted to give everyone a heads up and ask for any feedback you may have at
> this time.

thanks for proposing to bring weak references into core, I myself would 
have needed them once or twice.

One point from the RFC bothers me:

> The proposed API:
> - does not support serialization

That is a really unfortunate decision, I would really like to have them 
serializable. Otherwise if you want to persist a weak ref you always 
have to convert them to a real ref before serialization and back 
afterwards. I would really like to have this transparency build in. 
Would be great if that could be added.

I am a little surprised how often the "is not serializable" label is put 
on something proposed in an RFC and how little that seem to bother 
anybody. That just makes serializing data much more complicated/prone to 
errors/exception.

Thanks for your work,
Dennis