Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:107015
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <076701d56978$86020910$92061b30$@php.net> <CAKuGYLQA+XMHLGXPM4n_eEdp-d1=WzDE4Z4iLOzhD+4m83McaQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <467be4a0-dd8b-29d2-0b09-a3efd7fad56a@heigl.org> <CAJHtznwJLryZa1fWHXUJd5OS+9YKBjAj30fpN7sjR3By7a-DbQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAfnsFU8B7gpd1=CpO+eDr7ogqDdFX7pZYNTT9rSoTDz+ybUQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANvqVdpiRRxO-9AvQJebvjKmL8454p7NLeirOZD7YKNhRzjjgg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAwbVue0Pb9_pHGexEsgOiDGutm8Uk-UarAg4KsTZirnwv3QJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANvqVdrozL53POuayum8ZoEC90XmaCfR8KLJvUfBGDTFJEUbeg@mail.gmail.com> <CAAwbVucrOBgVtC8BZe7KTJtj79He53XXxQ0WKGFTKFvL_pg40Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAwbVucrOBgVtC8BZe7KTJtj79He53XXxQ0WKGFTKFvL_pg40Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:25:10 -0500
Message-ID: <CANvqVdoDyHeA+PyHHNOO+9Jc7ZBKsy99=Y-_jsoVeeKncuqRsw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Olumide Samson <oludonsexy@gmail.com>, Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004a6fe00592601901"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Changing fundamental language behaviors
From: michael.babker@gmail.com (Michael Babker)

--0000000000004a6fe00592601901
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 2:17 PM Olumide Samson <oludonsexy@gmail.com> wrote:

> Most of these changes wouldn't have been problematic to you if the
> language has prevented you from writing what we can now consider bad code,
> so please allow the new PHP developer that newly start using PHP to not
> follow that your path that will/might hunt him later in the future...
>
> There a notices, warning and errors to inform you that this shouldn't have
> been the use case of this feature and you chose to ignore it and now, we
> are simplifying things and making those your errors teach you how to write
> proper codes in the future, you're objecting.. Why not just stay in PHP 7.x?
>
> Or were you implying you want hitch-free, no-modification upgrade to PHP 8
> from PHP 7.0?
> If yes, follow the best practices and not suppress error notices.
>

We're clearly talking past one another so I will be going back to work
after this response.

I am not saying anything about whether the warnings RFC should pass or
fail, or if it makes my code good or bad.  I responded explicitly to one
idea about creating a LTS version that might somehow make it easier for
RFCs like this one to be accepted because users could basically be
encouraged to stay on the LTS version if the new major version introduces
too many breaking changes, which I think is bad justification for creating
a LTS version.  I'm not sure how that equates to my code being good or bad
or whether I am following someone else's recommended best practices, but
that was never the point of discussion.

--0000000000004a6fe00592601901--