Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:115953 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 67100 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2021 03:29:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 5 Sep 2021 03:29:47 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEABE1804B4 for ; Sat, 4 Sep 2021 21:06:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-ej1-f52.google.com (mail-ej1-f52.google.com [209.85.218.52]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Sat, 4 Sep 2021 21:06:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-f52.google.com with SMTP id bt14so6364948ejb.3 for ; Sat, 04 Sep 2021 21:06:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=PYUZSQ2oF59rLFeDb++zdOzhmzFMxRx/aTUk3k1AdwM=; b=KNlx9OFftZk7ATSNcoIgc5cOKf09Jl8IU6K/+aLad7o/dPM4yuJXMkM7AAWukkSZHC shUDAEvCJBpemcdjetRdns9S9v9hMkzYJDvcIR39sMlZZSeZVo45+UNSLRoH//D8SIW8 Nw+eY1PzaSuzOindPrWPEbs/NJVIggBoAh6qS2UQFX1bbJOdE9IdatIuiwUfCDW8RPFM gdL0W+41Z5WBilvERV2GNgDKDF7FhR3urUPMvsPsOMKiLVSQ/fG2NGqfALMnAd7Td/53 Fe/Avf9jQdY3E9jlU8dT7RlChzFxI3X1tkllhuJJZ0rmNJQzR1z8EhPSIORP4plQtSXj 6Tew== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=PYUZSQ2oF59rLFeDb++zdOzhmzFMxRx/aTUk3k1AdwM=; b=sjDHtd07USxNiHEUJuOuhg9WAto+OHfxUuoQpkF0nLjRXJgwXNfZ4rx8Cfp3ki/5iJ NH2kWg+Rhd5lNhCxV8m5hOig3rZEkrR2iVOF14WQ6qo0zsqdeHKZTxfmXxxKvhV6Zu4c oeO4AaAjnMtULts1FPuB7M8+VAae/uFjh2qjZJYV1C0/C0D+P6zd4Gvoz+DpTeJENQ+x uVwqAp7MoO08nPgBgeq7grk33fjfSWcF7RMarp3Ri46XFCHY7jYIog6GqpoQ48t2JBNa u9S/BdJoB4VTI0T+Lw6kKSslPawvNk/Qc15OHqjJl6D+AFrZHVIjML976PQVxwJgQn+Z sxCg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533RuGm2UlwOCAUKWcwftzMvO7lkpLP3xIXlJqlaxP01H0k6tsy3 P6LfZG87yOOqb7h556lEZEXoUTI6tWECyAg9ZjH42djPuOltzA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxP6uVaTmVTJmHasHXM6Ji2BRYXWDdWtBGHYB5stH9muZq232OJ3Q6UAnVd53buaYQbdV8QZAxfNkj7dyZ5QTA= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:e85:: with SMTP id p5mr6987645ejf.159.1630814799174; Sat, 04 Sep 2021 21:06:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2021 13:06:28 +0900 Message-ID: To: Dan Ackroyd , PHP internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000cc9db405cb37a82d" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Random Extension 3.0 From: zeriyoshi@gmail.com (Go Kudo) --000000000000cc9db405cb37a82d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This may not have been the best way to put it. The point I was trying to make was that while BC Breaks do occur, they are very easy to solve. The impact on downstream projects will be significant, and there may be many extensions affected, since this change concerns a frequently used RNG feature. However, in other words, it may need to be sorted out as soon as possible. However, I also understand the theory that this should be done in conjunction with a major language change. Perhaps I should have suggested this for PHP 8.0. Either way, I'll try to separate these suggestions if necessary, but if we were to try to provide an OOP API without BC Break, what do you think would be the ideal form? Regards, Go Kudo 2021=E5=B9=B49=E6=9C=885=E6=97=A5(=E6=97=A5) 4:24 Dan Ackroyd : > On Fri, 3 Sept 2021 at 18:41, Go Kudo wrote: > > > > Nikita wrote: > >> this one also moves all of the existing RNG-related functionality > >> from ext/standard to ext/random. > > > > There are several reasons for this. > > > > - The `random` extension name is already used by ext/standard and may > > interfere with the build system. > > - Due to the namespace rules for new extensions, it is inappropriate to > > rename an extension. > > - Due to history, the rand / mt_rand dependency is tricky and I thought > it > > was time to sort it out. > > - I don't think it's a good idea to have multiple header files for a > single > > domain feature. > > Have you considered how much work that is going to incur on downstream > projects? > > If there's a good reason for moving stuff around then it can be > appropriate, but the RFC phrasing of: "At the same time, the > following internal APIs will also be relocated. If you want to use > them, you can _simply_ include ext/random/random.h." sounds pretty > dismissive of causing possibly unneeded work for downstream projects. > > cheers > Dan > Ack > --000000000000cc9db405cb37a82d--