Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:117396 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 58587 invoked from network); 22 Mar 2022 13:48:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 22 Mar 2022 13:48:33 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C85FB1804AF for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 08:15:02 -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=3.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_SOFTFAIL,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE 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-oi1-f172.google.com (mail-oi1-f172.google.com [209.85.167.172]) (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 ; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 08:15:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi1-f172.google.com with SMTP id e4so16741194oif.2 for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 08:15:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=otoCGvLDdPndjYRQA5w6qiYk7kowI/fcQ+0z31M4RJQ=; b=J/eH57K4Fji+81/YPhmPsDNY9IF6S+81VXv3fi8jK4mxgPoVCafvJ3fcByUL5i80MQ KISKKI3ywWZTRIQFBu0w75m1Y8FMQj/MeyPuGEYXOSMybdR7T6MPtZKKf2rlwtmKlSLE Pu+l0rmtGVpSpPyEtI36XcBv9BKAMmECtdi9EsG7G8sHMUadINw6FK81ZcH2nWo1DuHI ozYlSLBo7XNrSa7AnivndnED6GkbjVUgd1OLIxCowbhZl/DrD4hVhF/ne6r3PfUktiMl gbmr3IcBx7w5AqRz268YzpaxUys39cIk9R+KDcjpYqH7g/5oaEZCS13MranUqf8kksoZ QZAg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Q4jA5xHAeTE1muMfmptznVlr9Na7aE4BpzIGT4hM+cwV9+vM4 N6l5KPPdH/1YfsZ2v0lbBQJF5p4mjP9kQTq1r6xG6g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzqZGo1do0PRZ+qf87OM0jK90wG9uxClj4aP9AfSvwdRkAj5f7oV3/cshC1VOI5e3lj/53cb/EQuhyx99eATOU= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:1511:b0:2ec:f5ea:39a7 with SMTP id u17-20020a056808151100b002ecf5ea39a7mr2352400oiw.175.1647962101752; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 08:15:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1289b56c-e766-4889-bbb2-06abb4e63a6d@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 10:14:50 -0500 Message-ID: To: Robert Landers Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_Marcin_Brzuchalski?= , Larry Garfield , php internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000adb7aa05dad01372" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Discussion: String streams From: pollita@php.net (Sara Golemon) --000000000000adb7aa05dad01372 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 5:38 AM Robert Landers wrote: > > But why can't we have generic operator overloading in which case this could > be completely built by libraries in userland? > I mean... honestly, I feel like I come back around to this very quickly. Generic overloading gives us much more at the end of the day and allows the people using PHP day in and day out to make the actual decisions about what any of these APIs should look like. So while I said I wanted to avoid the firestorm suggesting userspace overloading would bring, maybe that's the question to ask: Who's just a hard-nope on userspace operator overloading? If your reasons go beyond foot-gun (and that is a valid reason), could you share what those reasons are? -Sara --000000000000adb7aa05dad01372--