Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:65084 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 76524 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2013 13:27:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 22 Jan 2013 13:27:00 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=cpriest@zerocue.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=cpriest@zerocue.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zerocue.com designates 67.200.53.250 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: cpriest@zerocue.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.200.53.250 mail.zerocue.com Received: from [67.200.53.250] ([67.200.53.250:37167] helo=mail.zerocue.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 65/57-28294-3A39EF05 for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 08:26:59 -0500 Received: from [172.17.0.122] (unknown [70.112.216.188]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.zerocue.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1F01A120363; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:26:57 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <50FE939B.6000509@zerocue.com> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 07:26:51 -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: Marco Pivetta CC: Lester Caine , PHP Developers Mailing List References: <50F840F4.7080704@zerocue.com> <50FE7579.1010409@zerocue.com> <50FE7933.8010000@lsces.co.uk> <50FE8A89.80307@lsces.co.uk> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5 From: cpriest@zerocue.com (Clint Priest) On 1/22/2013 6:55 AM, Marco Pivetta wrote: > @Lester your explanation simply exposes the fact that your resources to > upgrade to newer technologies are insufficient. This doesn't mean that > newer technologies don't have to exist. > > And no, it won't be possible to fix all bugs/flaws before getting a new > feature. We'd all be running in circles looking for perfection :) I can agree that some things need fixing though, perhaps Lester could put together an RFC detailing the myriad of things he deems critical to be fixed. > Marco Pivetta > > http://twitter.com/Ocramius > > http://ocramius.github.com/ > -- -Clint