Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:54276
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.210.170 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4E360F63.8000006@sugarcrm.com>
References: <CACs9DU5nEkFha+kKeWK3X7OvrdcFYPWMUUqOAXHzwYmKzwNy7Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADajX4ARvzOi_mcJSEJDKjrETjbvQrCZM63MYM3LpygaLm3sJg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACQesk7O+JtL2QwikB9vNg=cjC=26+nmOC=CA8NNfdf33XNF0A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACs9DU4NBEocPgXoWkgD4LU+KGj2mh96oV0jwVn2FDgia0sBAQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACs9DU6-dRn=Fk1GdsQ5jde-Ee3QZz8LCyB-+aq8Ob_Hq7H3EQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E360F63.8000006@sugarcrm.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 09:30:37 +0200
Message-ID: <CACs9DU6n6SzjNmN3D-UNehJn_-c4sUDv5OHXAuxbhwzKJ+Awqg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>, internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd4a5ee817c9c04a96c9bc4
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Weak References
From: landeholm@gmail.com (Hannes Landeholm)

--000e0cd4a5ee817c9c04a96c9bc4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

 Arguably the feature is already "popular". I have pointed this out many
times before but many other major OO languages provides weak references
natively. Read the introduction in the RFC.

Pragmatically speaking (as a framework designer) you are unfortunately not
so privileged on what PECL/PHP extensions people should use and have loaded
or not. Many hosting providers does not give you the option to load your own
extensions and does not change the default configuration. So you are really
avoiding non standard features when designing generic
applications/frameworks that should be usable by anyone. This means that the
PECL extension popularity proves nothing. Implementing it as a PECL
extension will most likely prevent people from using it. I wouldn't.

Finally to fully support Weak References in the future it has too make some
small adjustments to the GC so the collection event can actually be caught
(see rfc/additional cleanup and __destruct()). That might also be reason to
why it should be implemented directly. Etienne Kneuss should be able to
answer this better.

~Hannes


On 1 August 2011 04:28, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I think I'm missing some important point here. Why this can't be
> implemented as PECL extension? I looked at the patch and saw nothing that
> requires engine involvement. So why not just create a PECL extension? If
> people start using it and it gets popular, we can merge it to core as we did
> with many others.
> --
> Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
> SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
> (408)454-6900 ext. 227
>

--000e0cd4a5ee817c9c04a96c9bc4--