Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:116417
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAF+90c9_qu=PiTS81J2mesPfJdz7n5nSi3qoLNLjhEGN-aTytA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAF+90c9XwAwbA60NQgnu5btiuE_Y9n8eASnVi8TH65jK3A2C8w@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.23.453.2111150948120.4221@singlemalt.home.derickrethans.nl>
 <371ca983-2b07-ae39-3629-49cf7ff8ee64@heigl.org> <CAF+90c-om9Qq7YAaf_GdRxKn5e-=8WRVDvy1gC=pA2C8dH=Wqg@mail.gmail.com>
 <497ab532-a39d-389c-8bca-86768650c2f4@heigl.org> <ae25a625-20ca-bc9a-d1ee-0f7ac4eba7c7@gmail.com>
 <a66fa304-1025-6953-0c3f-ca1dcbca81df@heigl.org> <d7f1982b-4253-c370-2d83-f5301b0f39e8@gmail.com>
 <a3a71094-c0f9-5d79-3cdc-089b7a6b1093@heigl.org> <bd3c2076-c7f1-eba0-e77e-334d13430416@gmail.com>
 <CAO3MkaD4+kY+M4qA-36mzHx1rX6yamtzHEEu9g8A-uEmJkTHmA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADK1yXJ4LCGSqXDA+_QgEkWn-6LO1GBTqemGC8dhFBfZgQmWSQ@mail.gmail.com> <44d41e93-4284-c9f2-1e96-f6993e3f5f52@heigl.org>
In-Reply-To: <44d41e93-4284-c9f2-1e96-f6993e3f5f52@heigl.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 18:24:28 +0200
Message-ID: <CAAwdEzD_YE-b4ad2JiFu2ivcuhKbJOmiPzBSOtXYQFtKJ4j6ag@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andreas Heigl <andreas@heigl.org>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000104da805d0ea5def"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Deprecate dynamic properties
From: drealecs@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Alexandru_P=C4=83tr=C4=83nescu?=)

--000000000000104da805d0ea5def
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 6:00 PM Andreas Heigl <andreas@heigl.org> wrote:

> Hey list.


<snip>


> Which performance improvement of the "original state" of the RFC? As
> that was one of the questions that were not 100% answered: What are the
> benefits for the language. And while those 8 bit that Nikita mentioned
> in the "Motivation" part of the RFC look nice, he also stated that "this
> is a fairly long-term benefit that will require additional technical
> work to realize".
>

I think these two messages might have some information about the
performance improvements:
https://externals.io/message/115800#115848
https://externals.io/message/115800#115872

Yes, maybe not everything was captured in the final RFC text. I also think
all the evaluated options should have been present in the RFC as it brings
more context to voters.

Regards,
Alex

--000000000000104da805d0ea5def--