Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:53289
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 63.205.162.117 as permitted sender)
To: Derick Rethans <derick@php.net>, PHP Developers Mailing List
	<internals@lists.php.net>
Thread-Topic: [PHP-DEV] Give the Language a Rest motion (fwd)
Thread-Index: AQHMJQLZqLRX+QB92EWWKhyBl9u1h5S95t9w
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 05:02:27 +0000
Message-ID: <8757232E56758B42B2EE4F9D2CA019C9014CE547@US-EX2.zend.net>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1106071203020.5202@whisky>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1106071203020.5202@whisky>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Give the Language a Rest motion (fwd)
From: andi@zend.com (Andi Gutmans)

Hi Derick and all,

I think we have had some reasonable additions to the language in PHP 5.3 + =
will have a couple of good ones in PHP 5.4. That said, I do agree we should=
 have a strong bias against language feature creep unless there is a really=
 strong compelling reason.
I do think that an increase of focus on enriching the eco-system around the=
 core language esp. PHP extensions will be a lot more valuable. This is esp=
ecially so if we can target many of the up and coming technologies and get =
such extensions production ready to bundle in Core PHP (hence my previous e=
mail re: adding some modern extensions).

We've benefited in the past from a lot of enhancements and innovation aroun=
d extensions incl. SimpleXML, variety of database, json, datetime, etc... H=
aving another wave of really strong core extensions would be very beneficia=
l and consistent with our past bias to deliver everything Web developers ne=
ed out-of-the-box.

Hence my suggestion to bundle MongoDB extension and possibly work on additi=
onal extensions. Some of my suggestions probably rightfully didn't get much=
 interest such as Thrift.

Maybe we should consider making a list of extensions we think could be bene=
ficial and the new mentorship program can actually help deliver some of the=
m?

Stas, on a different note, weren't we going to roll a 5.4 alpha?
Andi

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Derick Rethans [mailto:derick@php.net]
>Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 4:05 AM
>To: PHP Developers Mailing List
>Subject: [PHP-DEV] Give the Language a Rest motion (fwd)
>
>Hi,
>
>Short-array syntax, Native JSON, "Currying". I can almost only say one thi=
ng:
>WHY?!
>
>And because of that, I'd like to forward a mail by Zeev from a few years a=
go. I
>think it applies now even more than then:
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 12:57:32 +0200
>From: Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com>
>To: internals@lists.php.net
>Subject: [PHP-DEV] Give the Language a Rest motion
>
>I'd like to raise a motion to 'Give the Language a Rest'.
>
>Almost a decade since we started with the 2nd iteration on the syntax (PHP=
 3),
>and 2 more major versions since then, and we're still heatedly debating on
>adding new syntactical, core level features.
>
>Is it really necessary?  I'd say in almost all cases the answer's no, and =
a bunch of
>cases where a new feature could be useful does not constitute a good enoug=
h
>reason to add a syntax level feature.  We might have to account for new
>technologies, or maybe new ways of thinking that might arise, but needless=
 to
>say, most of the stuff we've been dealing with in recent times doesn't exa=
ctly
>fall in the category of cutting edge technology.
>
>My motion is to make it much, much more difficult to add new syntax-level
>features into PHP.  Consider only features which have significant traction=
 to a
>large chunk of our userbase, and not something that could be useful in som=
e
>extremely specialized edge cases, usually of PHP being used for non web st=
uff.
>
>How do we do it?  Unfortunately, I can't come up with a real mechanism to
>'enforce' a due process and reasoning for new features.
>
>Instead, please take at least an hour to bounce this idea in the back of y=
our
>mind, preferably more.  Make sure you think about the full context, the hu=
ge
>audience out there, the consequences of  making the learning curve steeper=
 with
>every new feature, and the scope of the goodness that those new features b=
ring.
>Consider how far we all come and how successful the PHP language is today,=
 in
>implementing all sorts of applications most of us would have never even th=
ought
>of when we created the language.
>
>Once you're done thinking, decide for yourself.  Does it make sense to be
>discussing new language level features every other week?  Or should we,
>perhaps, invest more in other fronts, which would be beneficial for a far =
bigger
>audience.  The levels above - extensions to keep with the latest technolog=
ies,
>foundation classes, etc.  Pretty much, the same direction other mature
>languages went to.
>
>To be clear, and to give this motion higher chances of success, I'm not ta=
lking
>about jump.  PHP can live with jump, almost as well as it could live witho=
ut it
>:)  I'm talking about the general sentiment.
>
>Zeev
>
>--
>http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org Like Xdebug? Consider a donati=
on:
>http://xdebug.org/donate.php
>twitter: @derickr and @xdebug
>
>--
>PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit=
:
>http://www.php.net/unsub.php