Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:64774
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.51 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPaKmRn1w2k9O24j29SUFxO5KuWf6UWE1aZZ_urZyiroi_NfxA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAyV7nEWD7SYjjN_kia9rSknjL2BKi157G1r5VJPfTkHB4Y5ww@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPaKmRn1w2k9O24j29SUFxO5KuWf6UWE1aZZ_urZyiroi_NfxA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 14:00:47 -0500
Message-ID: <CAAyV7nHafth_86-t+z1d=m6=8Pspewniz+pdYFBEjyjhrWt-FQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Amaury Bouchard <amaury@amaury.net>
Cc: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>, 
	"internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec54fb0601bd4c704d2dfae78
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Was Reflection annotations reader - We Need A Vision
From: ircmaxell@gmail.com (Anthony Ferrara)

--bcaec54fb0601bd4c704d2dfae78
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Amaury,

Would you shut up with this rhetoric already? All it does is show that
>> you're completely and utterly out of touch with the reality of modern
>> development.
>>
>> Frankly, I'm getting sick and tired of seeing these recurring themes of
>> "PHP is not java" and "I never want this". If you never want this, then
>> don't contribute to the discussions at all.
>>
>
> What's the point? If only those who agree can talk, I'm not sure about the
> result...
>
> If Stas doesn't like the proposed syntax, how can he express his dislike
> in a sufficiently positive manner? (it's a honest candid question; I'm
> asking it even after receiving nice and harsh responses to my patch
> proposal last summer)
>

Well, the point is that there are two ways of voicing your dislike. You can
say "I never want this" or other rhetoric, which helps nobody else but to
understand that you don't want it. Or you can be a little bit more civil
and reply detailing your concerns, and say "Based on that, I don't like
it".

There's a HUGE difference between the two. One puts a foot down on the
ground. The other shares concerns and lets people learn from why. To be
fair, Stas did do a good job in those threads voicing his concerns.

But IMHO the "I never want this" and similar rhetoric has no place on a
mailing list for a language in an Open Source project...


>
>
>> PHP NEEDS a vision.
>
>
> Rasmus' answer was about balance. I guess it's hard to strongly define
> what a language should be; there is no drawable line. Each step is
> questionable in some way, This balance is the strength of PHP, the root of
> its flexibility.
> But I totally understand your frustration.
>

Well, I'm not saying we should "strongly define" the language. I'm just
saying a vision statement that's a little more specific than "web language"
would frame the discussions in a context that could make them significantly
more productive... But it shouldn't be so rigid that there's a drawable
line. But the line should be implied enough that the discussion around a
feature leads to the precise line. As it currently stands the discussion is
more akin to determining if a line exists, yet alone where it is...

Anthony

--bcaec54fb0601bd4c704d2dfae78--