Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:118557 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 20685 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2022 22:38:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 3 Sep 2022 22:38:30 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12E6E180084 for ; Sat, 3 Sep 2022 15:38:28 -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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NONE, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS19151 66.111.4.0/24 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Sat, 3 Sep 2022 15:38:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E94B95C0084 for ; Sat, 3 Sep 2022 18:38:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap50 ([10.202.2.100]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 03 Sep 2022 18:38:25 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= garfieldtech.com; h=cc:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:sender:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1662244705; x=1662331105; bh=qemVfbEbEj 9+PqSU9YYzBwe4uoSWERZd2L2PTjA4L2U=; b=OC6qIMJKAfFAzh7hCwgdekAQYy JWq1JQGbHBjaTNZ6ZnhMOkVsl0PmQkyJlwA6dfDdn3RWQNDE8R/HjdZabqsW6r0z iHu5gJCp0zqAywlF+NhPRKCzrlBI51PqNy9Y/FhU1k1j3hldKcE9FshRHEpzyvCV 9ml1PoL6idSqR66bLLRI74X2QJJx+A+VMH7EyRQZr3+7oNSBnL/FFap77QuSK0zX Bzs4K0inYD89mQC5YAsUwcbmzr9rgeX117+ToO1mhvyVo1xfcmUKvwo9jJHgOalN djo7BPtC6ZSFJr0N9p3KDmDqYPbPBtN78jDDM2jzSKv1fFu0V438kZ4879nQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:date:feedback-id :feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1662244705; x= 1662331105; bh=qemVfbEbEj9+PqSU9YYzBwe4uoSWERZd2L2PTjA4L2U=; b=o /VCupdf1Mj4RYsqkk9S1x4Me1bjg4ZFcLOLVvi9dHDSZKY2AstdE5Y4oDXPJQJzv rDOdvO54a5IxGSmy/6GT07qxZ6UkRAP/EDAlgYTBh43h8YfzS+hvy76Oxz81okfU +VS5L0PJVzFQif+bo0KFT4VwaQC21X2GTkmK2yl5T6Kdh5hdAY1naE0G5EZ7ZGuY yPqMhZB19zF8LKh0LyUnOw+9G0Qi9MLW7liqNg12J3j3jQq8MSyLbN+vXcZKjYvv jCGalOawfu/AWb0dlxZ6b7x7no2w48P1dsVSCuj5nuALNkD1aEOE92e/aR4okemB rgYIODNv1adhOGAVPM95g== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrvdelfedguddvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne goufhushhpvggtthffohhmrghinhculdegledmnecujfgurhepofgfggfkfffhvffutges thdtredtreertdenucfhrhhomhepfdfnrghrrhihucfirghrfhhivghlugdfuceolhgrrh hrhiesghgrrhhfihgvlhguthgvtghhrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeffuddv udeihffhvdekheetledugffhffekudevvdetieeuhedvtdehvdevtedvueenucffohhmrg hinhepghhoohhglhgvrdgtohhmnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghm pehmrghilhhfrhhomheplhgrrhhrhiesghgrrhhfihgvlhguthgvtghhrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i8414410d:Fastmail Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id AD94D1700082; Sat, 3 Sep 2022 18:38:25 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.7.0-alpha0-841-g7899e99a45-fm-20220811.002-g7899e99a Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <879a586d-6ec4-438b-828c-48fa65e7e7a5@www.fastmail.com> Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2022 17:38:05 -0500 To: "php internals" Content-Type: text/plain Subject: [RFC][Poll] Asymmetric Visibility and Accessor syntax From: larry@garfieldtech.com ("Larry Garfield") In case some people didn't see it in the previous thread, I am bumping this poll: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSefq15VvGNIXSnQaMTl3RW451w0E8oesny8c4PLqmKl8HhQ-Q/viewform This is an informal poll on behalf of Ilija and I to determine the syntax pattern we end up using for both Asymmetric Visibility and Property accessor hooks. We in particular want to get feedback from RFC voters, because as we all know "discussion on the list" is frequently highly unrepresentative of the actual voter sentiment, and finding out "I like the idea just not that particular syntax" after a vote fails, well, sucks for everyone. If you are planning to vote at all on either RFC, please take a few moments to read the question being asked and give us feedback so we can produce something acceptable to the broadest number of people. -- Larry Garfield larry@garfieldtech.com