Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:125135
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3776.700.51\))
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [Concept] Flip relative function lookup order (global,
 then local)
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 14:56:21 +0200
References: <CAPyj-LCoBY2bPHLmsyONYDbY9aRSraLz5QNskeTiWfpMD0pTSg@mail.gmail.com>
 <c385b525-37f7-446b-aa96-72272ef9e407@app.fastmail.com>
 <CAPyj-LA4kTJTrQZUkn9kNMvWdH6SsFGU5mBO6EcpuUcRpXesgw@mail.gmail.com>
 <d4b18a48-93b0-49c8-821d-f9298e831188@rwec.co.uk>
 <BD6D644E-A90C-49B8-B51A-C9D4C943FDF6@newclarity.net>
 <846D7756-712B-4A7C-9FC6-DB9F858836B8@rwec.co.uk>
 <880ffc27dc9b421407a670c75d5f5ba756870396.camel@ageofdream.com>
 <790534cd-e158-4712-878c-642dfd0e2bad@app.fastmail.com>
 <a0db04a7fa1d9c77b9d2b0110b50a47ef959e98f.camel@ageofdream.com>
 <d26516d7-afaa-4174-81f0-361785908967@app.fastmail.com>
 <d8bf24792d307d07863176772fbf35ec701b6b4b.camel@ageofdream.com>
 <63F3CFAA-0D9A-4323-A1A4-0E3544281ECE@cschneid.com>
 <b44a775b-c264-4d36-b7ff-7075b8d5dbaf@app.fastmail.com>
To: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <b44a775b-c264-4d36-b7ff-7075b8d5dbaf@app.fastmail.com>
Message-ID: <64406CFC-D844-46D9-BC08-BCD405D7BB53@cschneid.com>
From: cschneid@cschneid.com (Christian Schneider)

Am 23.08.2024 um 12:27 schrieb Rob Landers <rob@bottled.codes>:
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2024, at 12:14, Christian Schneider wrote:
>> Am 23.08.2024 um 11:34 schrieb Nick Lockheart <lists@ageofdream.com>:
>> > I think we are all trying to achieve the same thing here.
>>=20
>> I'm not sure who "we" and what "same thing" here exactly is.
>=20
> Nick was replying to me :p, judging by the quoted paragraph.

The "all" in his sentence suggested to me that he means more than him =
and you.
But then again I might have misinterpreted this.

> As far as function overloading goes, I recommend checking out a draft =
RFC I've been working on a very, very long time: =
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/records. In some off-list discussions, it was =
clear that if I wanted this syntax, I would need to pursue function =
autoloading.

Definitely an interesting read, thanks a lot for the work you put into =
it!

> Further, function autoloading is a clearly missing feature that would =
be useful in many situations.

The "clearly missing" and "many" part is where I disagree. But I was =
mainly considering current PHP, not future PHP syntax like the Records =
stuff, agreed.

> If function autoloading doesn't work out, I will need to take a =
different approach to that syntax (which is fine, but not something I =
want because I chose the syntax for a very good reason).

I know you do not want to discuss this here as it is off-topic but it =
kind of feels the only advantage is to get rid of "new" in the usage of =
Records. But I'll leave it at that as to per your request, we can =
revisit that once the RFC hits the discussion stage.

> That being said, I'm not ready to discuss records here, so this is the =
first and last time I'll mention it on the thread. There is a Reddit =
post in r/php and a GitHub repo if you are interested in discussing =
records. There are very many things to work out still, and it is very =
much work-in-progress.

Also a bit off-topic but I still have to mention it, maybe worth another =
thread:
I understand where you are coming from but at the same time it feels a =
bit worrying to me to use another medium (reddit) for a discussion about =
future language features when we have this mailing list.

I hope this won't mean that questions/suggestions/concerns on this =
mailing list won't be discredited because of discussions which happened =
elsewhere. I'm sorry if I sound a bit paranoid here but I've been in =
this situation before in other (not software related) aspects of my life =
before where I was told that something was already decided and people =
were not willing to go back on certain issues because of that.

Regards,
- Chris