Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:128916
Feedback-ID: ifab94697:Fastmail
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2025 08:40:28 +0200
To: "Edmond Dantes" <edmond.ht@gmail.com>, "John Bafford" <jbafford@zort.net>
Cc: "Aleksander Machniak" <alec@alec.pl>,
 "PHP Internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
Message-ID: <9cff5bd5-3cb0-49c7-b95c-0679290bf99d@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAMW7n8AZxiHRMbVbUFZfj=O4X68HkfoTzA8tLO407zHGiWXLTQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAMW7n8DGbFnQzjt3s9CcOBwhp+MUOV+K3U=yY=ULOTdUXaOLHQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <0e4e39d6-9cc9-4970-92e0-2463143b4011@app.fastmail.com>
 <CAMW7n8AgHnO0rBjqBkHNhfvV5PBNxwgHBJ762N3FtVxoh5WnOQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <E8D4A549-79EA-48E9-9D20-3608F357F227@trowski.com>
 <CAMW7n8D0wMNQE0zuMhbHstyZsDw=e7ryPPZERn11UFV7knmR-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <37180d8d-85b4-49a3-a672-334bf4329470@app.fastmail.com>
 <CAMW7n8AFaUByiJ=2frgkAFWNPWHS2wYyHiKfwf8dzT7AYnLjWg@mail.gmail.com>
 <2f8524a7-dea2-4fbf-933a-c538d3706253@app.fastmail.com>
 <CAMW7n8DKB+AWp2sWPi_w8ZgLQ_zS2MPNgP6n1G5127Nkk7EgOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <151800a7-1094-49bc-8e43-c593a74741af@app.fastmail.com>
 <CAMW7n8CWMpUmVB+FHjuYNFMzswbW5Lo19C1D6CTri6HVsddwkQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <c1f712d7-4922-4620-a1c6-e8fca72c9a55@app.fastmail.com>
 <CAMW7n8B_+fBQEWoB6f2nNM7CPH5MfAHQ154dbyMLmDCS6-4Mhw@mail.gmail.com>
 <C3EEAC36-A8ED-4B82-BDFC-879EF923E079@zort.net>
 <CAMW7n8D3m-dsBJyq-vk09ft5Vx+6yHc8wrv2sbJ3EMVp+i4m=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <C92EA4F8-F76F-4B84-B573-5154D4A1C86E@zort.net>
 <CAMW7n8AZxiHRMbVbUFZfj=O4X68HkfoTzA8tLO407zHGiWXLTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP True Async RFC Stage 4
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary=75b6c96ef1bb4a1597524c0edb62004f
From: rob@bottled.codes ("Rob Landers")

--75b6c96ef1bb4a1597524c0edb62004f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Oct 23, 2025, at 07:56, Edmond Dantes wrote:
> Hi,
>=20
> > The RFC should include a description of _why_ cooperative cancellati=
on has been chosen.
> If I add detailed explanations for every _why_ in the RFC, it might
> never get read :)
>=20
> Thanks, Ed
>=20

If someone opens a PR to fix a bug or an RFC that builds on this and the=
re is question of whether the bug is actually a feature or if it should =
be done a different way =E2=80=94 years from now =E2=80=94 often the onl=
y thing to go off of is the reasoning in the RFC. See the recent Readonl=
y Property Hooks discussion for an example, where it was different peopl=
e interpreting the same near-decade-old RFC different ways. Spelling it =
out might feel long-winded, but it is already long=E2=80=A6 a few more p=
ages won=E2=80=99t hurt.

=E2=80=94 Rob
--75b6c96ef1bb4a1597524c0edb62004f
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE html><html><head><title></title></head><body><div>On Thu, Oct =
23, 2025, at 07:56, Edmond Dantes wrote:</div><blockquote type=3D"cite" =
id=3D"qt" style=3D""><div>Hi,</div><div><br></div><div>&gt; The RFC shou=
ld include a description of _why_ cooperative cancellation has been chos=
en.</div><div>If I add detailed explanations for every _why_ in the RFC,=
 it might</div><div>never get read :)</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks, E=
d</div><div><br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>If someone opens =
a PR to fix a bug or an RFC that builds on this and there is question of=
 whether the bug is actually a feature or if it should be done a differe=
nt way =E2=80=94 years from now =E2=80=94 often the only thing to go off=
 of is the reasoning in the RFC. See the recent Readonly Property Hooks =
discussion for an example, where it was different people interpreting th=
e same near-decade-old RFC different ways. Spelling it out might feel lo=
ng-winded, but it is already long=E2=80=A6 a few more pages won=E2=80=99=
t hurt.</div><div><br></div><div id=3D"sig121229152">=E2=80=94 Rob</div>=
</body></html>
--75b6c96ef1bb4a1597524c0edb62004f--