Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:67246
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain mindplay.dk from 209.85.128.179 cause and error)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAEU6NAeGLS7EHU9v2fPkoRD1Wevoe=PLSJNwkGDPPhvxm8UtKA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADqTB_gkE-2mmnE8AKWCx3rcHf8DVsgxVPO00usErnaoKjAv7g@mail.gmail.com>
	<6245ED6B-2BF7-47B7-80C0-D3B3D8E0B312@strojny.net>
	<CADqTB_iGghhwuKb7StpjY7xogNM76_47rxL3O7G+T0zOK2Lf3g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALJZF3hQC09_b=yzOF5F6V1ifC5wG1H4RmkTDg02awm0cC-tWA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADqTB_gxnPt-PzpaBiTmX5iW81VyssvtZW5Ugto2vOw1NsZGZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAH-PCH6oHkTweqYsY3UqeaP9Jdqkrmj1DBhxueUv5uU-U7YrPg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADqTB_gTVm1TMcg5iaUZ-WTZChdpj7s+-vLaa7BK54FA71T-Sg@mail.gmail.com>
	<51803086.6020002@sugarcrm.com>
	<CADqTB_inCPzQyN=VoTgVkvYN2p0gTGH-nEp=pAuL71N2P6e19Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<51805A00.4050803@lerdorf.com>
	<CADqTB_gv82cq_4YyLgwvt5r+NZ4h_CjqKc=bbjt1MYE6eJu28g@mail.gmail.com>
	<5180652D.1080007@lerdorf.com>
	<CADqTB_jeWqSCz=3v4byBdJWrHnFV4kxPCkEWVRyYwz2XOSSEag@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEU6NAeGLS7EHU9v2fPkoRD1Wevoe=PLSJNwkGDPPhvxm8UtKA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 08:55:33 -0400
Message-ID: <CADqTB_gFAa4T622CDVJBkuq=_1n2KdrnR426uoOx-jVv-NXtrw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Lind <peter.e.lind@gmail.com>
Cc: Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com>, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>, 
	PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e011767512ee85404dba7a2c1
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] property de-referencing
From: rasmus@mindplay.dk (Rasmus Schultz)

--089e011767512ee85404dba7a2c1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

>
> Then why are you not convincing them first to get them on board as support
> for your proposal.


It's not a proposal yet - I didn't want to write a lengthy RFC just to
learn that all I had was a brainfart, or that everyone was going to be
totally opposed. Having the discussion here surfaced a ton of questions
that (so far) indicate (to me) that this might be a good idea, and also
helps me address all of those questions if I do end up writing an RFC.

If you think gathering the information in an RFC is the next logical step,
I will try to find the time :-)


On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Peter Lind <peter.e.lind@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On 1 May 2013 14:35, Rasmus Schultz <rasmus@mindplay.dk> wrote:
>
>> >
>> > This is a fringe feature, as evidenced by the fact that you
>> > are having a hard time convincing people that it is needed
>>
>>
>> As with anything that isn't already established and well-known, it's hard
>> to convince anyone they need anything they don't understand - I think the
>> barrier here is me having difficulty explaining a new idea/concept. That
>> doesn't make it a fringe feature - I have already demonstrated by example
>> how this would be useful in practically every mainstream framework.
>>
>>
> Then why are you not convincing them first to get them on board as support
> for your proposal. Right now you're obviously fighting an uphill struggle.
> Whether that's because your proposal is without merit or because you have a
> hard time convincing people on this mailing list remains to be seen - so
> how about taking a smarter approach and convincing your target audience
> first, then come back here with more support and a better proposal?
>
> Just a thought.
>
> --
> <hype>
> WWW: plphp.dk / plind.dk
> CV: careers.stackoverflow.com/peterlind
> LinkedIn: plind
> Twitter: kafe15
> </hype>
>

--089e011767512ee85404dba7a2c1--