Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:106974 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 56623 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2019 17:52:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp3.php.net) (208.43.231.12) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 12 Sep 2019 17:52:08 -0000 Received: from php-smtp3.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp3.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E872F2D19B2 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:28:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp3.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPOOFED_FREEMAIL, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17 X-Spam-Virus: No Received: from mail-wr1-f44.google.com (mail-wr1-f44.google.com [209.85.221.44]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp3.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:28:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-f44.google.com with SMTP id l3so6202129wru.7 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:28:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:thread-index :content-language; bh=g87lvZiKzLbcsdYP0GixMq6NvbH39KxDZX93/HOHj4Y=; b=ijHa1AcRiBjgyfaiMe9MCszGgNcA8zj2HdX/D9hZeNuRwraplp9k2/qtU9woLgzqCC AEY6flFmVylgNSsHOWBWXktRi1lR+S3Xm37jod7fA0Re+/5uxFAvZIKxeiv7kE5SpIJg BpvtfB1s/79Aervr3XmJ2ZWDVdMIdGDk0P6Ydf4z6CR7tZ6UpeofM7GsbJHNhOwHAM4Z 9QVF0cNXBKCpVhRT7bX0h0VXlyaEIJa7QGss2dazG4kcKbC6lQ4uoruK7vcxfLhkdWT7 Unb2bYXX8IkxrLu/pfKngnUkEDMbJTjl1JPkiLaf82yEVjwHseb2OP34wk50S4cbAYDp mPoA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVU2K6wi0aS1nLb35ckkfAbnJ9+u+27AbiVBlHcEWqOS5V1O325 LnAjghGHKEorsfRZWgb09Pj/rhPc X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwmNSVaJVoQuMJzmPxy2WRxW1cCSTQ3lv4OOupjakuWEOrCmy4glaGurcYcgiLfwxoX7NgmUw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:10ce:: with SMTP id b14mr33372729wrx.96.1568302080559; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:28:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eCenter710 ([77.137.81.220]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a144sm446724wme.13.2019.09.12.08.27.59 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:28:00 -0700 (PDT) To: "'Olumide Samson'" Cc: "'PHP internals'" References: <076701d56978$86020910$92061b30$@php.net> In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 18:27:58 +0300 Message-ID: <07b701d5697e$a9080ad0$fb182070$@php.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 thread-index: AdVpdKJV77qMYNHSRqeIC8bFiEITfAABRSwAAABZj4AAAFzXkA== Content-Language: he X-Envelope-From: Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Changing fundamental language behaviors From: zeev@php.net ("Zeev Suraski") > -----Original Message----- > From: Olumide Samson > Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2019 6:03 PM > To: Dan Ackroyd > Cc: Zeev Suraski ; PHP internals = > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Changing fundamental language behaviors >=20 > The RFC is Request for Comment on any changes, is there an explicit or = implicit > mention about what kind of proposed changes can be made? While the Voting RFC was probably one of my worst creations - because = it's was so laconic and lacking (although it still probably did more = good for PHP than bad) - yes - there's a strong implication as to what = it's meant to deal with and what it isn't meant to deal with. Here's what the Voting RFC said: "Given that changes to languages (as opposed to changes to apps or even = frameworks) are for the most part irreversible" I understand this isn't written black-on-white that you can't deprecate = a fundamental language behavior. But it's clear that "having to win a = 2/3 vote" isn't quite the definition of "irreversible". The idea behind = the 2/3 requirement (a number that I came up with) was to ensure that = the motivation to undo that addition/change will likely remain very low = in the years following the vote on the RFC. Why? Because once it's in = - it's in. It cannot be taken out. It's irreversible.=20 So no, a 2/3 vote does not get us the mandate to deprecate a fundamental = language behavior. It's basically a reasonably high bar to add = something to the language - given that we know that once we add it, we = cannot take it away. Nothing more, nothing less. Zeev