Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:124931
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAM7F2-_i58wfkdspFRGcsDLBp8eDB2aby5ENym3KpWAf+Tq6bw@mail.gmail.com>
 <89C901BF-DCEA-498E-93B0-750C49E6275B@getmailspring.com> <CAM7F2-895zXfqyDLt9C0_WYTkAAP9Q4wG86Xz6pn8xHNE2wfFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <0BB4DB2D-62E1-40F9-91F3-7D48367D2CBE@edison.tech> <CAM7F2--N28KTb3fqL=qOppMEqxiM+6Mo9d=ztQBUVfYqcWUnXA@mail.gmail.com>
 <9fb2c610-eed9-4773-8158-adef581d6a5b@free.fr>
In-Reply-To: <9fb2c610-eed9-4773-8158-adef581d6a5b@free.fr>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 12:31:19 -0600
Message-ID: <CAM7F2-_HBv8SFrE3+Pb7afyqLXvBr2-paVrdCkpgmFi3ubn2Ww@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [DISCUSSION] C++ Enhancements in Zend API
To: Pascal Chevrel <pascalc@gmail.com>
Cc: Mike Schinkel <mike@newclarity.net>, John Coggeshall <john@coggeshall.org>, 
	Levi Morrison <levi.morrison@datadoghq.com>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000050a67c061fa8ef2a"
From: lnearwaju@gmail.com (Lanre)

--00000000000050a67c061fa8ef2a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 4:30=E2=80=AFAM Pascal Chevrel <pascalc@gmail.com> =
wrote:

> Le 14/08/2024 =C3=A0 05:03, Lanre a =C3=A9crit :
> >
> > Mozilla introduced Rust years ago, yet Firefox remains primarily C++,
> > with only about 3% of the codebase in Rust.
>
> Hi,
>
> 10.3% now https://openhub.net/p/firefox/analyses/latest/languages_summary
>
> Firefox is 31 million lines of code, that means 3.4 million lines of
> code written in Rust.
>
> Rewriting everything in Rust has never been a goal but Rust is usually
> favored over C++ for new projects or rewrites. I don't think you can
> take Mozilla as an example (pro or con) in the context of PHP as the
> contexts and constraints are way different.
>
> Regards
>
> Pascal
>
>
So how is Rust relevant to this conversation? PHP is implemented in C AND
C++ already, except it has shitty C++ support. I bring that up and propose
improving it and what am i met with? Stupid questions about rust with
stupid reasons for not wanting this in core. I mean look at this shit:

   - If it's so easy and transparent to improve support for C++, it could
   easily exist outside of core as a set of header files to make the lift
   lighter for someone looking to use it. Sounds like that project already
   exists (no idea, didn't look into it).
   - Even if it's "easy" with a few header files, it's still adding a whole
   new thing required to maintain the project because now someone has to ow=
n
   and maintain a C++ API and every change to the "real" C engine needs a
   corresponding C++ API update. Who here long-term is going to own that
   engine-level API and make sure it's "the C++ way"...you? The way you're
   behaving I wouldn't trust you to not rage-quit today... so who then? Wha=
t
   happens if there is a conflict between "the C way" and "the C++ way" in
   regards to a new engine-level API down the road? What kind of extra thou=
ght
   / energy / consideration do we need to put into engine-level API changes=
 in
   the future because now we have to maintain two distinct engine APIs?
   - If it's not so easy and transparent (e.g. requiring us to start
   modifying the engine because C++ isn't happy), I'm opposed to the idea
   because conceptually I'd like to see any such effort spent on improving
   support for a future-looking language. I honestly don't care what that i=
s,
   but considering Linux's recent embracing of Rust I think that's got some
   merit to consider. For the record, I don't personally even code in Rust =
so
   attacking me like I've got a horse in that race is pretty ridiculous.
   - I don't believe that just because something is prevalent means it's
   good. Entire governments are starting to recommend not using C/C++ becau=
se
   of the security risks posed by its non-existent memory safety. If PHP wa=
s
   being written today, it wouldn't have been written in C.

Clearly this guy has no clue what he's talking about, yet I'm supposed to
convince people like him? His suggestions range from "leave it to a third
party lib" to "i don't trust you to not rage-quit". I'm not asking for
anything extreme=E2=80=94just to improve the API. Yet, I'm being told that =
C++ is
obsolete because of Rust. That's why I mentioned that Firefox is still
primarily written in C++, even though they've introduced Rust. I'm not
expecting a full Rust rewrite from them (which would be both unwise and
wasteful); I just want to highlight how unreasonable it is to suggest that
improving C++ support in the engine is pointless.

Cheers,
Lanre.

--00000000000050a67c061fa8ef2a
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div=
 dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 4:30=E2=80=AFAM P=
ascal Chevrel &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:pascalc@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">pa=
scalc@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" s=
tyle=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);pad=
ding-left:1ex">Le 14/08/2024 =C3=A0 05:03, Lanre a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0:<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; Mozilla introduced Rust years ago, yet Firefox remains primarily C++, =
<br>
&gt; with only about 3% of the codebase in Rust. <br>
<br>
Hi,<br>
<br>
10.3% now <a href=3D"https://openhub.net/p/firefox/analyses/latest/language=
s_summary" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://openhub.net/p/firef=
ox/analyses/latest/languages_summary</a><br>
<br>
Firefox is 31 million lines of code, that means 3.4 million lines of <br>
code written in Rust.<br>
<br>
Rewriting everything in Rust has never been a goal but Rust is usually <br>
favored over C++ for new projects or rewrites. I don&#39;t think you can <b=
r>
take Mozilla as an example (pro or con) in the context of PHP as the <br>
contexts and constraints are way different.<br>
<br>
Regards<br>
<br>
Pascal<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>So how is Rust relevant to this conver=
sation? PHP is implemented in C AND C++ already, except it has shitty C++ s=
upport. I bring that up and propose improving it and what am i met with? St=
upid questions about rust with stupid reasons for not wanting this in core.=
 I mean look at this shit:</div><div><ul><li style=3D"margin-left:15px"><di=
v>If it&#39;s so easy and transparent to improve support for C++, it could =
easily exist outside of core as a set of header files to make the lift ligh=
ter for someone looking to use it. Sounds like that project already exists =
(no idea, didn&#39;t look into it).</div></li><li style=3D"margin-left:15px=
"><div>Even if it&#39;s &quot;easy&quot; with a few header files, it&#39;s =
still adding a whole new thing required to maintain the project because now=
 someone has to own and maintain a C++ API and every change to the &quot;re=
al&quot; C engine needs a corresponding C++ API update. Who here long-term =
is going to own that engine-level API and make sure it&#39;s &quot;the C++ =
way&quot;...you? The way you&#39;re behaving I wouldn&#39;t trust you to no=
t rage-quit today... so who then? What happens if there is a conflict betwe=
en &quot;the C way&quot; and &quot;the C++ way&quot; in regards to a new en=
gine-level API down the road? What kind of extra thought / energy / conside=
ration do we need to put into engine-level API changes in the future becaus=
e now we have to maintain two distinct engine APIs?</div></li><li style=3D"=
margin-left:15px"><div>If it&#39;s not so easy and transparent (e.g. requir=
ing us to start modifying the engine because C++ isn&#39;t happy), I&#39;m =
opposed to the idea because conceptually I&#39;d like to see any such effor=
t spent on improving support for a future-looking language. I honestly don&=
#39;t care what that is, but considering Linux&#39;s recent embracing of Ru=
st I think that&#39;s got some merit to consider. For the record, I don&#39=
;t personally even code in Rust so attacking me like I&#39;ve got a horse i=
n that race is pretty ridiculous.</div></li><li style=3D"margin-left:15px">=
<div>I don&#39;t believe that just because something is prevalent means it&=
#39;s good. Entire governments are starting to recommend not using C/C++ be=
cause of the security risks posed by its non-existent memory safety. If PHP=
 was being written today, it wouldn&#39;t have been written in C.</div></li=
></ul><div>Clearly this guy has no clue what he&#39;s talking about, yet I&=
#39;m supposed to convince people like him? His suggestions range from &quo=
t;leave it to a third party lib&quot; to &quot;i don&#39;t trust you to not=
 rage-quit&quot;. I&#39;m not asking for anything extreme=E2=80=94just to i=
mprove the API. Yet, I&#39;m being told that C++ is obsolete because of Rus=
t. That&#39;s why I mentioned that Firefox is still primarily written in C+=
+, even though they&#39;ve introduced Rust. I&#39;m not expecting a full Ru=
st rewrite from them (which would be both unwise and wasteful); I just want=
 to highlight how unreasonable it is to suggest that improving C++ support =
in the engine is pointless.</div></div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><di=
v>Lanre.</div></div></div>

--00000000000050a67c061fa8ef2a--