Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:120580 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 73727 invoked from network); 14 Jun 2023 22:26:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 14 Jun 2023 22:26:39 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D8921804F2 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2023 15:26:39 -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=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, 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-wm1-f54.google.com (mail-wm1-f54.google.com [209.85.128.54]) (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 ; Wed, 14 Jun 2023 15:26:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-f54.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-3f8d65ecdb8so12763165e9.0 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2023 15:26:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1686781597; x=1689373597; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=qWNyvciD0HQ2AXFZSk/vy/jv0jjMabTxmiaMQ6zf1dk=; b=H8I42w7wnPkr9TWrpMT4gOxQ+OkeWY52aNVgudsiYf2ka0FZna9Rj4dllXSKwmq2ev bG8MnRMi+H8VaUvq5P6tu6TknMVtJ7EJhzmojjVqT80cVsuWUPcQBIxU17lGWBNarE3C DSBxTJFr/ClSmqGzWXZd3NfaXbIulV1o2gqkvErwOC6DOBMPkG9vWT5goPAf8h476/Zw bBPWEU8gAkS+NJnSxBdY5UI7ocwPKd6wDMl74ewlaMvTFpayW13zAWQFuTQGwKqUFVrT WFbWDxJtku/HP0HDcVWSl2QRJNcqaHdUX27lzWs4HBVYi31gIR2a2jhJ2sRnAX+uVfTr Szog== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1686781597; x=1689373597; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=qWNyvciD0HQ2AXFZSk/vy/jv0jjMabTxmiaMQ6zf1dk=; b=dZQBJ3MMz5bOPtVq44YZmNrIRTJd70Cr3bpPwDXPsqIph4Oi23X8fLkWoYkdkMBhwE JBpY3yaAQLML5eaqzpXupBdsU/VFJK3QGAtkuApH9PSXepn51AUPyE/uCRaTi/qkWZBO sUWTlKk3hDUptAYJX2U04X23oijgAQ6uw+QuqcdsH8RCpcwAhnfqZo9GI4ASsXAvL2X4 xJClyMRXrIbQiMpda+07sKS6jIqWHqhX0waP5abGWF61b7Y3TTL1Dnj2Tn7YQI2t/BUb T5ONVvF/AxPJhdRDWDprcD4XBZB0ferZK9V7+mMZgUNxELO2q1/cy1bjsuhxKc5upK3d jyJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDwJXX0RO/i1rkwczXNHMzUKtmpsiBxi5OJhXceL2YQPrCKXoaNm 8nYobquxO3Fv50GaCP5SGen6QABNPC0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ4bi047x9diHieKyGoLbjSMn8iXTlCZyfPiGpAR9bzTByqMfb4l7KVLKD7W+jKLAtiJz9XdJQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:b56:b0:3f7:3991:61e5 with SMTP id k22-20020a05600c0b5600b003f7399161e5mr15331193wmr.4.1686781597256; Wed, 14 Jun 2023 15:26:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.22] (cpc83311-brig21-2-0-cust191.3-3.cable.virginm.net. [86.20.40.192]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id 17-20020a05600c22d100b003f8044b3436sm18202317wmg.23.2023.06.14.15.26.36 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 14 Jun 2023 15:26:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <9f94163f-ed27-a9af-2ee5-fc12b0b4343e@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 23:26:36 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.12.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <108411AD-DBC4-4436-8190-7569B7A0805F@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-GB In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: Fwd: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Discussion] Deprecate functions with overloaded signatures From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Tommins) On 14/06/2023 22:51, Máté Kocsis wrote: > The whole discussion about also deprecating the other one started only > because of improving naming: > it is also a nice thing to pursue but fails the cost-benefit analysis. In my mind, making two new names, both unambiguous, gives a greater benefit (a clearer final state) without that much extra cost (more people will have to change their code, but fewer will be confused about whether they need to or not). > All in all, I think neither not doing anything, nor deprecating the > whole function is a good choice. The more I think about it, the more I'm leaning towards not doing anything being the best choice. The benefit seems small, and the cost high. Regards, -- Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]