Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:122584 X-Original-To: internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: internals@lists.php.net Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (php-smtp4.php.net [45.112.84.5]) by qa.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 738321AD8F6 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 15:58:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=php.net; s=mail; t=1709913532; bh=Anw/vrzvwvEPCd75HrPIzWrTZMQd4vLB/TBx1IL+Ia8=; h=In-Reply-To:References:Date:From:To:Subject:From; b=XjFTrI+Z4yR3jQ+0z5JN18G17Q3OEPz4mZR+4o3YTVmZRMibDRY2E16bpuECOUWdb 5vlgi7qknynQ3rTPDaZ0XnM4jgktLGoDyM14+5ZymucZSbHyGnRxDIM2Bpdw0J/idi KZtfoPnuAv+vhIVABzhxvOiGJG6FaBkBmLvvNXV3aAcVifq6EFIFeyZgKAsXQCEGIE WoNtvkgAgqNJ9F08IwFcGZ8VZhECrae0F99l+i16+K/9iL3GQNH2r2glDcg3vBdBbA p2qqPvzpgp6ceHMD1qTkZEMOYCqs1CMuNw9325zCsuWAFkRKFKLkGdbf5IZHSdx4sl 4jdN9gDdTtHhg== Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A57A1806A8 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 15:58:51 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,DMARC_MISSING,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=4.0.0 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 15:58:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39FFB5C004A for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 10:58:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from imap50 ([10.202.2.100]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 08 Mar 2024 10:58:37 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= garfieldtech.com; h=cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from :from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1709913517; x= 1709999917; bh=d1auVo059csJcVyT2psX5qnB/yKiyXIa1No42r5Zgzc=; b=X /fKHB7oWC4BR/DqAKMNSBISezrJu/KvVHV9bu4T8CTDjM0le6HKr6rtodOah5dog ZHvnyEVWf509Li7D4QJ/T6gBIQjJnvwuFeI1QGL0j9VVwU1jhkY0/yY+a3SEiaqT vQQ3J35ZaK2zNGul33QVfqQFj/Xv4ld+NmyQdZbRLNQ823mnbz8PabS7FgV7yQAV rwvFEjiVrTgK347jNi9bASErMKkXf+qSJxJdj9GS2IbC58/pOlkSBxRtQfEYqaXl ZtyIVDgHAzxs8XJoZhTYltr4QLphoWAyaYPAPGwxiX8elZblZie/tntIWFYirNch x1AQF/vfNI2mIlwMVPtEw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; t=1709913517; x=1709999917; bh=d1auVo059csJcVyT2psX5qnB/yKi yXIa1No42r5Zgzc=; b=Qq2/Ge0JiCdUDnVuez3bOVcx+1EVKETyDDR7jXCah4cx BizUz0+3mytkLVNv+CCIksNeJ/BfQWHWufywAbj4vn9gcKnigGsecPzZ7hy3Afxd a2tPd84zNBf9M7qj1fZrEDuLh19uuSVkd3zrpMptNRdvzdbYb8KYU5hFqZJ3bXiV eHTKEoWdlc94dLMSysbcHRChAAKsLyCcl14TAjhbVOzvoToSc172n7p9P8fVY+Zw 7jSymqj5zhf+E4T9R6Zpvr7E4qAdDq1v+YZFPq8161fPi/R19QelVJMavAKpIajH JdXU3miYH8XMbRqQyeAiIiRNMsxkIswssAsjyMPhaQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvledrieehgdekvdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsehttdertderredtnecuhfhrohhmpedfnfgrrhhr hicuifgrrhhfihgvlhgufdcuoehlrghrrhihsehgrghrfhhivghlughtvggthhdrtghomh eqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepgeelgfekudeivddvteffueejffdthfejieevhefgffek udevkedtvdelvddvffefnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrg hilhhfrhhomheplhgrrhhrhiesghgrrhhfihgvlhguthgvtghhrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i8414410d:Fastmail Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id A605F1700093; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 10:58:36 -0500 (EST) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.11.0-alpha0-251-g8332da0bf6-fm-20240305.001-g8332da0b Precedence: bulk list-help: list-post: List-Id: internals.lists.php.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <7d05d51f-f301-4d62-b1c0-83e6a2e0632e@bastelstu.be> Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2024 15:58:16 +0000 To: "php internals" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] int|float for sleep? sleep(0.1) => sleep 0.1 seconds Content-Type: text/plain From: larry@garfieldtech.com ("Larry Garfield") On Fri, Mar 8, 2024, at 8:12 AM, Hans Henrik Bergan wrote: > On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 at 20:17, Larry Garfield wrote: >> >> A 3 way up-down vote doesn't make sense. What happens if none of the 3 options reaches 66%? >> >> The viable options here are a single RCV vote (which we've done before), or a single "Should we do this" vote that requires 66%, followed by a "when should we do this" vote with 2 options, majority wins. >> >> --Larry Garfield > > Does this work for you guys? > > ===== Proposed Voting Choices ===== > > ### 1. Enhancement of Precision: Float Arguments for Sub-Second Precision > > **Should we extend `sleep()` to accept floats for sub-second delays?** > - Yes > - No > > **Which PHP version should implement this feature if accepted?** > - 8.4 > - 9.0 > > ### 2. Normalized Return Values on Windows > > **Should we modify `sleep()` on Windows for consistent return values?** > - Yes > - No > > **Which PHP version should implement this feature if accepted?** > - 8.4 > - 9.0 > > ### 3. Enhanced Return Value Precision > > **Should we increase `sleep()` return value precision to include > fractions of a second?** > - Yes > - No > > **Which PHP version should implement this feature if accepted?** > - 8.4 > - 9.0 > > @Tim >>adding a short *nix explanation of when sleep will > return earlier than expected would be helpful > > Where should that be? in the "Introduction" section? or the "Proposal" > section? (or elsewhere?) That seems reasonable, yes, assuming you want the change broken up into 3 votes. I haven't actually looked at the RFC itself in detail to say if that's wise or not. Do things still work if any given subset passes but not others? Generally you would put the above into the Voting section, with a text note saying that the main votes are 2/3 and the "When" votes are 50/50. Then structure the RFC so that it breaks into 3 pieces naturally, and note in the introduction that there's 3 related changes under consideration. --Larry Garfield