Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:106257
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 20:09:50 +0100
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <CAFPFaMLpZ=okschrpeH77AhZTHcvFBuPf1S1bXH6psxmvABK7g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFPFaMLpZ=okschrpeH77AhZTHcvFBuPf1S1bXH6psxmvABK7g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To: internals@lists.php.net
Message-ID: <5C8F3403-2972-467A-AFA5-347C09E5FA73@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Deprecate PHP's short open tags V2
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins)

On 23 July 2019 18:54:48 BST, "G=2E P=2E B=2E" <george=2Ebanyard@gmail=2Eco=
m> wrote:
>The only point of contention of this RFC that I potentially see is the
>removal in PHP 8=2E1 after short open tags being a Parse Error in PHP 8=
=2E0
>instead of it being removed in PHP 9 after it having had a whole major
>version release cycle=2E

Given that you've already predicted that this will be controversial, could=
 you provide some rationale for it? Unless there's a major burden in mainta=
ining the parser error behaviour for a few years, waiting for the next majo=
r version would seem both safer and more in line with official versioning p=
olicy=2E

As with deprecation itself, any violation of the "no breaking changes" rul=
e, however slight, should have an explicit justification=2E If I had a vote=
, any RFC omitting such a justification would receive an automatic "no" fro=
m me=2E

Regards,

--=20
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]