Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:106301
To: "vsuraski@gmail.com" <vsuraski@gmail.com>, "'G. P. B.'"
	<george.banyard@gmail.com>, 'PHP internals' <internals@lists.php.net>
Thread-Topic: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Deprecate PHP's short open tags V2
Thread-Index: AQHVQX/FKgmnFTLCd0G5WPxZF4q/1KbZIy4AgALJc+I=
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 22:40:45 +0000
Message-ID:
 <ME2PR01MB2868B5E4479EA313979CD6E68DC10@ME2PR01MB2868.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com>
References:
 <CAFPFaMLpZ=okschrpeH77AhZTHcvFBuPf1S1bXH6psxmvABK7g@mail.gmail.com>,<00f201d541d3$1863db80$492b9280$@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <00f201d541d3$1863db80$492b9280$@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-AU, en-US
Content-Language: en-AU
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: terah.com.au does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="_000_ME2PR01MB2868B5E4479EA313979CD6E68DC10ME2PR01MB2868ausp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 183d1543-c44e-414a-95fc-08d7115121eb
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 25 Jul 2019 22:40:45.4005
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 68c9d99e-69fa-4a95-8fb0-d8794660a353
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: terry@terah.com.au
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: ME2PR01MB4466
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Deprecate PHP's short open tags V2
From: terry@terah.com.au (Terry Cullen)

--_000_ME2PR01MB2868B5E4479EA313979CD6E68DC10ME2PR01MB2868ausp_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



________________________________
From: vsuraski@gmail.com <vsuraski@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, 24 July 2019 1:51 PM
To: 'G. P. B.' <george.banyard@gmail.com>; 'PHP internals' <internals@lists=
.php.net>
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Deprecate PHP's short open tags V=
2



> -----Original Message-----
> From: G. P. B. <george.banyard@gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 8:55 PM
> To: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>; Derick Rethans <derick@php.n=
et>;
> Peter Kokot <petk@php.net>
> Subject: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Deprecate PHP's short open tags V2
>
> Hello internals,
>
> Due to the controversy after the initial vote on the Deprecate PHP's Shor=
t Open
> Tag RFC [1] here is a new RFC to deprecate them written with the help of =
Nikita
> Popov <nikic@php.net>.
>

George,

Thanks for creating a new RFC instead of going into a bit of a procedural l=
imbo.  I appreciate that.


Everyone,

Much of the feedback for v2 was around the problematic idea of changing beh=
avior between 8.0 and 8.1, but little was said on the premise of the propos=
al itself.  Much like the original RFC, the rationale for this deprecation =
remains quite weak.  The differences are that it's clearer now (3 separate =
motivations were rightfully condensed into just 1), and the bogus motivatio=
n that this would somehow simplify the parser was removed.  But same as wit=
h the original RFC - this RFC creates the impression of a problem that does=
n't really exist, and then provides a way of fixing it - while the 'do noth=
ing' option remains a vastly superior outcome in terms of gain vs. harm.

The simple reality is this:
- Absolutely nothing changed about <? since its introduction in 1998, for b=
etter or for worse.  The reasoning - about portable code/ini settings, as w=
ell as XML - was there 21 years ago when it was introduced - and still, it =
was introduced.
- If anything, XML became a lot less relevant.  There were *intense* discus=
sions about <? back in 1998, since back then - <? was all the rage.  It was=
 perceived as one of the most basic and fundamental building blocks of the =
future Web to be - as SOAP was beginning to form up and everyone thought th=
is was the future of Web-based services, as well as virtually anything else=
 - from config files to databases.  Reality, as we all know, took slightly =
different turns - and XML is a lot less relevant today than it was 21 years=
 ago.  It looks categorically anachronistic to care more about it today tha=
n we did back then.
- Short tags were *never intended for portable code*, and users who use it =
know that very well.  From the get go, <?php was introduced as the portable=
 start tag - and let's be honest with ourselves - everyone who remotely car=
es about portability (as well as many if not most of those who don't) - use=
 it exclusively.  Virtually all frameworks and projects have coding standar=
ds that disallow short tags.  You need to purposely turn it on in your own =
deployment - people and companies who use it use it exclusively for interna=
l purposes.

Which, in turn, translates to this:
- The motivation for removing short tags today is a lot weaker than the mot=
ivation was not to add it in the first place back in 1998 (XML being a lot =
less important).  This makes for an unreasonable basis for deprecation.
- Perhaps it was a mistake adding it in the first place, perhaps not.  Eith=
er way - the motivation for proactively removing it - and hurting users in =
the process - is simply not nearly sufficient when weighting the gain/harm =
balance:  Everyone who's not using it (presumably, mostly everyone reading =
this message) will be unaffected.  Everyone who is using it will be remarka=
bly unimpressed with the weak reasoning for removing it, and rightfully so.

This is a clear net-loss RFC if I've ever seen one.  I'm saying that as som=
eone who (like most of you) never uses short tags, but at the same time is =
not missionary against those who are and have been peacefully using them fo=
r potentially decades.

I do think that these counterpoints should be represented in the RFC, as ma=
ny folks vote on RFCs without regularly reading all messages on internals@.=
  I'll be happy to add them (of course, in a condensed summarized fashion).

Thanks,

Zeev



--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Hi Internals,

I completely agree with Zeev here.  When I first saw this RFC get proposed =
I though to myself that there's no chance this will get accepted as the epi=
c amount of legacy code using this feature would need to be changed and the=
 justification was too weak.  Wow... how wrong I was.

Personally,  I've written many of medium/large PHP apps for businesses over=
 the last 16 years all of which use short tags.  Many of which are still ru=
nning but the owners of these projects are not interested in spending any m=
oney on pointless updates and will simply stop upgrading PHP.

I'm a big supporter the direction PHP is going in with types and alike but =
this one has jumped the shark.

Terry Cullen



--_000_ME2PR01MB2868B5E4479EA313979CD6E68DC10ME2PR01MB2868ausp_--