Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:54045
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.170 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 18:19:24 +0200
Message-ID: <CACs9DU5nEkFha+kKeWK3X7OvrdcFYPWMUUqOAXHzwYmKzwNy7Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: internals@lists.php.net, Etienne Kneuss <colder@php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba6e8f9ad8dd6104a85a5c9a
Subject: [RFC] Weak References
From: landeholm@gmail.com (Hannes Landeholm)

--90e6ba6e8f9ad8dd6104a85a5c9a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hello,

This is the official RFC discussion thread for Weak References and an
announcement of the RFC.

Please read the RFC before replying: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/weakreferences

In a nutshell: The RFC proposes adding a single class called "SplWeakRef"
which provides the "Weak Reference" feature. This is the only change.

Previous thread was here: http://news.php.net/php.internals/53963

I'm creating this new thread for several reasons. First of all I feel that
the RFC is now somewhat complete and an announcement should be formally made
with the [RFC] subject in accordance to the voting procedure. Also the other
thread has more general discussion on internal reference counting and
garbage collection. Please keep this thread on topic - specifically about
Weak References and the RFC. If you plan on voting no to this feature,
please reply to this thread so we can discuss your concerns.

As I've previously stated, I hope that this feature can be released with PHP
5.4 since I need it for my own projects and open source framework. I don't
think this is unreasonable since it's such a simple class and also
non-controversial. It has been an established feature in many other major
OOP languages for years. I will therefore initiate voting as soon as
possible (In two weeks).

Thanks Etienne Kneuss for creating the first version of the RFC and the
patch and others for discussing it.

~Hannes

--90e6ba6e8f9ad8dd6104a85a5c9a--