Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:64782
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zerocue.com designates 67.200.53.250 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <50EDCB19.5000705@zerocue.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 13:55:05 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <CAAyV7nEWD7SYjjN_kia9rSknjL2BKi157G1r5VJPfTkHB4Y5ww@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAyV7nEWD7SYjjN_kia9rSknjL2BKi157G1r5VJPfTkHB4Y5ww@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------020201080102070502060608"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Was Reflection annotations reader - We Need A Vision
From: cpriest@zerocue.com (Clint Priest)

--------------020201080102070502060608
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Just a thought here, but perhaps what PHP needs now is a working group 
that works together to do some basic management of PHP as a language, 
take into account what the users are wanting, talking about, requesting 
and setting a vision and direction and make plans for what will and 
won't and when.  In short I think PHP lacks direction because "everyone 
has a voice" and "nobody has authority."

In the last two years of working on property accessors I think I have 
found this to be the most dis-tasteful aspect of working on the project, 
no person, document or group that leads.

On 1/9/2013 11:45 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
> Stas,
>
> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>wrote:
>
>> I seriously hope it never comes to this in PHP
>
> 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.
>
> If you have solid feedback to provide, then provide it. But saying "We're
> supposed to be simple language for doing cool stuff on the web" shows you
> have no idea what people have been doing (or don't want to acknowledge)
> with the language for the past 5 years.
>
> And that brings us to the root of the problem. Discussion like this is due
> to the fact that there's no clear "official" vision for PHP. Each
> participant brings their own concept and vision, and treats it like it's
> everyone else's vision as well (which is the exact reason for your reply).
> The need for voting is a byproduct of this lack of vision, not a
> requirement in its own right.
>
> For all the problems that a Benevolent Dictator brings to a project, this
> is not one of them. This is a case where a dictator that sets the vision in
> clear and unambiguous terms would actually improve the process quite
> significantly. Instead of worrying about voting or everyone doing what they
> want, there's a benchmark to measure proposals against.
>
> For example, imagine these different visions for PHP (which I know for a
> fact are shared on this list):
>
> 1. "PHP Should Strive To Be A Full Featured Object Oriented Language".
>
> In this context frame, things like annotations, mixins, generators, etc
> become the focus. As would moving the error handler to exceptions. And a
> host of other changes (boxing primitive types when treated like an object,
> etc). Adding functions like array_get_whatever would be frowned upon...
>
> 2. "PHP Should Remain A Procedural Language WIth Some OO Features"
>
> In this context frame, a lot of the stuff I said above goes away. And
> adding new array functions would be the norm. And it's plain to tell that
> exceptions shouldn't be implemented for errors.
>
> 3. "PHP Should Be Implementation Neutral, and Support
> All Paradigms Equally".
>
> This is as close to the current implementation as we currently are. We
> support procedural, OOP and functional constructs. But how deep does it go?
> Where's the line.
>
> PHP NEEDS a vision. It needs something to guide development. Not everyone
> will agree with it. And that's the point. It levels the playing field for
> contributions and discussions. Rather than every developer playing for
> themselves and saying "I hope this never happens", it puts it in the
> context of "I don't believe this fits our vision". Note the difference in
> tone between them.
>
> It's an ongoing joke about how abusive and unproductive the internals list
> is. I for one am sick of it. And rather than keeping ignoring it (or
> walking away), I'd rather see it fixed.
>
> Anthony
>

-- 
-Clint

--------------020201080102070502060608--