Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:111513
To: Levi Morrison <levi.morrison@datadoghq.com>, Derick Rethans
	<derick@php.net>, Benjamin Eberlei <kontakt@beberlei.de>
CC: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>, Sara Golemon
	<pollita@php.net>
Thread-Topic: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Shorter Attribute Syntax Change
Thread-Index:
 AQHWbvIBydbCX+rhJUWK/r8c7hnlt6k0kNaHgAALBwCAAAp7tYABDvUAgABUQtmAAAkjgIAAH1r+gAB81YCAACtXAIAApHfE
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 12:22:47 +0000
Message-ID:
 <BN8PR05MB6532D19BEA11F44BAAD3FDD3DE400@BN8PR05MB6532.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References:
 <alpine.DEB.2.23.453.2008100935570.7489@singlemalt.home.derickrethans.nl>
 <BYAPR05MB65355FFBB6717491995EEBF4DE420@BYAPR05MB6535.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAESVnVqraG9V4VMrxrv5AOFX5Jt7Cx0-uo5L0doQEWcUVOdHkg@mail.gmail.com>
 <BYAPR05MB65356FCC029CD06F49F528A0DE420@BYAPR05MB6535.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
 <CABdc3WobP1HSRwcujd4=o4wv3QUp7gDT12KmMRQU1_wLj4YLuQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <BYAPR05MB65351C807797676BB08D8BDCDE430@BYAPR05MB6535.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
 <5cc837df-ab47-628a-d29b-46d7933be973@gmx.net>
 <BYAPR05MB653522F9123B59F7E066BDB8DE430@BYAPR05MB6535.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
 <3A7CECC3-CDEE-4852-BF4B-4EC7CA1BD538@pmjones.io>,<CAAKU0u=VYh7D+XJ93dDdAxdJ8nEU8iPfeN0f=Xv9Qm=cCQKX6w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To:
 <CAAKU0u=VYh7D+XJ93dDdAxdJ8nEU8iPfeN0f=Xv9Qm=cCQKX6w@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-tmn: [Bo2BhNHd+TTtLowNIukl0DepGM43wRsU]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-incomingheadercount: 45
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 1d8ac879-5d3b-49d4-f62c-08d8404cc147
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: SN1NAM04HT049:
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info:
 6M9RrGGGLsgQAJ2tTZRDVLtnTJE1RwfHoTb7e1mgfRqpcSFbZ6V3OIzL89g37EPdK9SY9X+cZSBGrWtgRHlUaLY28A5nk2h2xkw0N7O2AnzVr7in1OI1O3VevUKupulXJ9hGOldv4ubVcOwuf5J+OHsQ31asgtV+naNYPvrtvHjay3/8MB/p8m15vV/ogkI2De5X/xr9Vfb7D4oOtJE9NCp0Y6h7LVkNBNvrfFdQ2umKjGhOvoKra1unW5zL+NXQ
x-forefront-antispam-report:
 CIP:255.255.255.255;CTRY:;LANG:en;SCL:0;SRV:;IPV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;H:BYAPR05MB6535.namprd05.prod.outlook.com;PTR:;CAT:NONE;SFTY:;SFS:;DIR:OUT;SFP:1901;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata:
 FJVNr5YW9ce9v+8IBsyPQAcaP8jkdEuP9jaaq0q10/4eVEvywRxJZ2xS13ULZH0pG3x7ETXwDBg5yubuDbRExipu39VsvxdSYqGvCIf/aGJXPShTLMJtiGAlHKMMW+eAzhSzR1xg7g7xxCPNHvl/9w==
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: SN1NAM04FT016.eop-NAM04.prod.protection.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-RMS-PersistedConsumerOrg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 1d8ac879-5d3b-49d4-f62c-08d8404cc147
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-rms-persistedconsumerorg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 14 Aug 2020 12:22:47.6786
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN1NAM04HT049
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Shorter Attribute Syntax Change
From: theodorejb@outlook.com (Theodore Brown)

On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 8:41 PM Levi Morrison <levi.morrison@datadoghq.com>=
 wrote:=0A=
=0A=
> > So, a week+ early, then? Surely that means the current vote null=0A=
> > and void, to be reset entirely following a proper discussion period=0A=
> > -- one without concurrent voting.=0A=
> =0A=
> I just want to make sure I understand: there are people who think we=0A=
> haven't discussed the syntax for attributes yet?=0A=
> =0A=
> I assume this is a serious email, but I can't fathom why anyone cares.=0A=
> We've discussed this subject soo much...=0A=
=0A=
Hi Levi and internals,=0A=
=0A=
There's certainly been a lot of discussion in general about=0A=
attributes. However, there was not a reasonable opportunity to either=0A=
discuss the specific arguments made in this RFC (e.g. the lack of a=0A=
closing symbol being inconsistent), or submit patches for alternative=0A=
syntaxes as Derick requested when he put up the RFC for discussion.=0A=
=0A=
I was very surprised that it went to vote less than six days after=0A=
the discussion period started, right after the weekend no less,=0A=
before I had a chance to submit my patch to include the @: syntax.=0A=
=0A=
I'm as weary of the discussion as anyone, and would like to see=0A=
closure on this topic sooner rather than later. But if the voting=0A=
rules aren't followed, how can the vote result be considered=0A=
legitimate or binding?=0A=
=0A=
If the authors sincerely want the best outcome for the language (and=0A=
I assume they do), what harm is there in deferring the vote until the=0A=
discussion period has completed, and ensuring that the RFC addresses=0A=
the arguments on both sides and contains all the relevant information=0A=
for making a decision? Otherwise many contributors (myself included)=0A=
just end up feeling unheard, unhappy, and unconfident that the right=0A=
choice is being made.=0A=
=0A=
With this in mind, I'd like to respectfully make the following=0A=
requests:=0A=
=0A=
1. Defer voting until the two week discussion period is complete=0A=
(Tuesday, August 18).=0A=
=0A=
2. Include a ranked voting option for @: and mention its pros and=0A=
cons (it is equally concise as @@ with no BC break, but is somewhat=0A=
harder to type). Patch link: https://github.com/theodorejb/php-src/pull/1=
=0A=
=0A=
3. Add a Backward Incompatible Changes section with examples of the=0A=
code that the different syntax options would break.=0A=
=0A=
4. Add a Discussion section briefly summarizing the arguments that=0A=
have come up on list. In particular this should include:=0A=
    a) Tyson's examples of #[] changing the meaning of code in=0A=
       unexpected ways between PHP 7 and 8 (e.g. a parameter=0A=
       attribute would remove the parameter when run on PHP 7).=0A=
    b) An example of the downside of grouping, where it causes=0A=
       unnecessary diff noise when adding or removing a second=0A=
       attribute on its own line.=0A=
I'd be willing to help draft this section if the RFC authors so desire.=0A=
=0A=
Derick and Benjamin (and Sara), are these requests reasonable? If the=0A=
RFC follows the discussion period rule and contains all the relevant=0A=
information, I will be much more confident that it is resulting in=0A=
the best long term outcome (and I think this would speak for many=0A=
others on list as well).=0A=
=0A=
Sincerely,  =0A=
Theodore=