Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:14627 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 79142 invoked by uid 1010); 4 Feb 2005 01:03:12 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 79126 invoked from network); 4 Feb 2005 01:03:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 4 Feb 2005 01:03:12 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.13.4.94 bgo1smout1.broadpark.no Solaris 9 Received: from ([217.13.4.94:49406] helo=bgo1smout1.broadpark.no) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity HEAD (r4105:4106)) with SMTP id 75/F4-05104-5C9C2024 for ; Thu, 03 Feb 2005 20:03:01 -0500 Received: from bgo1sminn1.broadpark.no ([217.13.4.93]) by bgo1smout1.broadpark.no (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.1 HotFix 0.05 (built Oct 21 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IBD003VM18CAAC0@bgo1smout1.broadpark.no> for internals@lists.php.net; Fri, 04 Feb 2005 00:57:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from pc ([80.203.129.71]) by bgo1sminn1.broadpark.no (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.1 HotFix 0.05 (built Oct 21 2004)) with SMTP id <0IBD00FOD1L89WC0@bgo1sminn1.broadpark.no> for internals@lists.php.net; Fri, 04 Feb 2005 01:05:32 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 01:05:30 +0100 To: internals@lists.php.net Message-ID: <065201c50a4d$3d2c4c40$0300000a@pc> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <00dd01c50a22$523a3780$0300000a@pc> <04da01c50a42$f1d20780$0300000a@pc> <85fbbef6debb33bc162646326ca8660a@omniti.com> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.1 From: tslettebo@broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Terje_Sletteb=F8?=) >From: "George Schlossnagle" >> Yes, I know that operator overloading, as well as statically >> typed/dynamically typed, type checking, etc. are hotly debated topics, >> and >> that can be healthy, at least as long as there are reasonable >> arguments for >> either side. What I decried wasn't this thing in particular, and I'm >> relatively new to the PHP online community, but from the responses I >> got, >> felt something of a complacency ("The language is good enough as it >> is. Who >> needs advanced features. They may be misused. Etc."), and I guess I >> reacted >> to that, because I find it rather different in the C++ mailing lists >> and >> newsgroups, where there's often lively discussions about the evolution >> of the language. >The real problem is that there's a constant influx of (usually) >well-meaning people like yourself who come to the lists to propose >ideas which have been discussed in depth numerous times before and >which have been discarded (for better or worse, my personal opinion is >for better in this case). I figured that could be the case, which is also, in my first postings, I said that if this had been discussed before, I'd appreciate pointers to it, because I hadn't found it in the archive. However, I got hardly any response to that, which is why I kept asking about things that may have been asked and answered a zillion times. >At any rate, it's been discussed before and shelved, long before you >came on the scene. Even though the topic is new for you in this venue, >it's old for many other people, and it gets annoying to rehash the same >topics every couple months when someone new joins the list. The >discussions are all in the archives though, if you want to see the >less-reactionary roots of the rejections. I've searched for "overloading" on the archive for this list, as well as others and the newsgroups, but, as I said above, found very little about it. However, now that I know it's there, I'll make a new attempt. Thanks for your reply. Regards, Terje