Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:66556
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: fail (pb1.pair.com: domain rafaeldohms.com.br does not designate 209.85.214.178 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <2bb1c8ba9522986b8c6d71ac8e5af0dc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <435a322ccb14090d3bcf6bf8a110396d@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEZPtU56QE=uMFcE+xe2vSzwCH_9KGFs33bJCySWpsx6Ed7k3w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABBJUpds9XnOZC9gfDs8OHmoe6hTQosqe8qzmTtTX4Xg-JsT+Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<8944597477930141639@unknownmsgid>
	<5138CBBC.8030409@lerdorf.com>
	<slrnkjhvva.g88.dsp@experimentalworks.net>
	<EC222032-F472-40B4-83F9-6BC34440204E@roshambo.org>
	<CAAyV7nHy3z--mXX0C-c3TWMP9__j27viwb=68jr5CkgXfZg4yA@mail.gmail.com>
	<2bb1c8ba9522986b8c6d71ac8e5af0dc@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 13:52:21 +0100
Message-ID: <CAOhuFvan4FhJahuXV9UjobG6p1Or1qygLk9-C6tgJZKX04udZg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andi Gutmans <andi@zend.com>
Cc: Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com>, Philip Olson <philip@roshambo.org>, 
	David Soria Parra <dsp@php.net>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8fb1f7f04e1ee404d7694bb4
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Integrating Zend Optimizer+ into the PHP distribution
From: listas@rafaeldohms.com.br (Rafael Dohms)

--e89a8fb1f7f04e1ee404d7694bb4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 6:55 AM, Andi Gutmans <andi@zend.com> wrote:

>
> The 62.8% comparison to 60.7% is the most out of touch thing I've read on
> this mailing list in a long time. If you're talking about pure feature
> yay/nay then 94% have given a yay to this "feature". The split is the
> timing.
>
>
Sorry, but math is not liable to what is being measured by a percentage. So
to this point if there is something being done without 2/3 approval, then
its wrong.
Does not matter what it is, who is proposing and who likes it or not.


> And as far as timing is concerned I do not see how this whole thing falls
> into the 2/3 vote for "new language syntax/prevent feature creep rule".
>



> Many times in the past have we aligned new PHP versions with runtime
> improvements esp. as they are often exciting and beneficial to most of our
> audience. I don't see why we wouldn't do that given that the cost is
> pretty minimal and the benefit to our audience is high.
>
>
I'm sorry, but Anthony's example is spot on for this. Property accessors
matter a lot to me and will benefit all frameworks and people who use them
there was no special treatment there and there should be no special
treatment here.

I'm right now oblivious to what is being voted or not in this case, but
ignoring
a defined 2/3 rule is clearly wrong. Either remove rules or follow them
otherwise they
become useless noise.

-- 
Rafael Dohms
PHP Evangelist and Community Leader
http://doh.ms
http://wwwamsterdamphp.nl

--e89a8fb1f7f04e1ee404d7694bb4--