Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:25155
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Message-ID: <6675.67.108.68.40.1154558112.squirrel@www.l-i-e.com>
In-Reply-To: <810494294.20060803000645@marcus-boerger.de>
References: <EB.71.29121.B6690C44@pb1.pair.com>
    <18810497049.20060801234124@marcus-boerger.de>
    <44CFDB2B.1010907@cschneid.com> <20060802010156.5be0258c@pierre-u64>
    <44CFDF89.6010506@lerdorf.com>
    <7.0.1.0.2.20060802153119.0c2193c0@zend.com>
    <59598.67.108.68.40.1154555745.squirrel@www.l-i-e.com>
    <810494294.20060803000645@marcus-boerger.de>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 17:35:12 -0500 (CDT)
To: internals@lists.php.net
Reply-To: ceo@l-i-e.com
User-Agent: Hostbaby Webmail
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Importance: Normal
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RfC: rethink OO inheritance strictness
From: ceo@l-i-e.com ("Richard Lynch")

On Wed, August 2, 2006 5:06 pm, Marcus Boerger wrote:
> Hello Richard,
>
> Wednesday, August 2, 2006, 11:55:45 PM, you wrote:
>
>> On Wed, August 2, 2006 7:32 am, Zeev Suraski wrote:
>>> I believe the problem is that 10 years ago we introduced what can
>>> be
>>> described as 'loose OO programming', and we're replacing it
>>> (instead
>>> of augmenting it) with strict OO programming.
>
>> And there are people who actually LIKE the 'loose OO programming'
>> paradigm.
>
>> Presumably also some who don't really care, but who have significant
>> bodies of code utilizing the 'looseness' who will simply refuse to
>> upgrade to PHP 5 -- thus exacerbating the problem of PHP 4 sticking
>> around for far longer than some would like.
>
> There is no problem with 4. It works it has its friends. Why should we
> discontinue it like Microsoft would do? Give me any reason. We just do
> not add new features.

I like 4 just fine!

There are some very nice features in 5, mind you... SOAP springs to mind.

The fact that active development of new features for 4 is the writing
on the wall that it's not something you want to use for new
applications.

My comment was more directed towards those who bemoan the large shared
webhost vendors who have not moved to PHP 5, rather than educated
developers who maintain legacy codebase in 4.

Anyway, there is still some point in the future where we'll actively
discourage users from continuing to use 4, just as we did with 3 and
with 2.

-- 
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm