Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:68103
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: softfail (pb1.pair.com: domain golemon.com does not designate 209.85.220.46 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: php@golemon.com
In-Reply-To: <51DF17FD.5030401@sugarcrm.com>
References: <CAA9esyS0YL=biVS37ix-yBea7RmZXPnhVk_xKjfz6x+gfN5LNw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAL+t6cF9JTr9e=A15LvhfgN0DaV8_k4SuEDxQ408fNAAx=8Z_A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOX1NOfBPTggj6-WA=ArXjw1UvhUbVC=+FjCYvk6Bgp856biFg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACwt+Je1vS7MkqShM8+FaDJmAoyaTDCWtTSOuOwG4iWUnyvKHA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMUwpuRC8WfrR26W+1hVgXDMt28OQXek68w=9YEGs2ueEiOewg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACwt+JfoZPuTYk0S3stoDdAftcRB1hAspXNQU4EBkVaX2uiStw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAH-PCH4BMFrjmNXDJXJ96QT9deWTi7P8P8OR-ZGcr6j=VQ5sig@mail.gmail.com>
	<1372258135.2410.22.camel@guybrush>
	<CAA9esyT854FV6PSxR9pTX3AZ05AJhaYchDmHyBb+Fq_r8rz1xA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAESVnVqZ2MBej6btO8=KJPVTKD5mOQD+Dzqn_zcZb7XqFSo7+A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKUjMCWU1AJhYi9GSPAZyU1U3Gh3paKOAw=fDidSeW96OSvUKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAESVnVry6r-=ttASy=xM_X5g+=TRQ84dB4cZ5PRQ=BQH29-rcA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAA9esyTeURYzngd2cszYyKLYp1=4W63np+OxzyhZBWaMP_s+ow@mail.gmail.com>
	<51DF0CDD.7060108@sugarcrm.com>
	<CAESVnVqZX=e46GuJZfyryo-iNsAffhw_zb6S2SfRSySxS=pNXw@mail.gmail.com>
	<51DF17FD.5030401@sugarcrm.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:48:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CAESVnVoaQB2vzqT20omEN8oUsJ-z-J1zEDJWRQFP-mvt2uSaNA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>
Cc: Florin Patan <florinpatan@gmail.com>, "RQuadling@gmail.com" <RQuadling@gmail.com>, 
	PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b15aabdc6590304e14283c7
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Request for comments - new PHP feature: return typing
From: pollita@php.net (Sara Golemon)

--047d7b15aabdc6590304e14283c7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

>
> > 1) HHVM isn't just running FB.  A number of sites have either already
> started using HHVM, or intend to soon.
>
> Were could I read about those?
>
> I didn't list any because I don't know how they individually feel about
sharing that info.  I realize that takes the wind out of my statement, but
there it is.


> > 2) The "static compilation" description is grossly outdated information.
>
> I guess my knowledge about HHVM is a bit out of date, which is no wonder
> as I wasn't following latest developments for some time. Could you send
> a link where I (and everybody interested of course :) could read about
> the current state of affairs?
>
> Apart from the documentation distributed with HHVM, you could look at our
blog http://www.hiphop-php.com/ which includes a walkthrough in getting
WordPress running http://www.hiphop-php.com/wp/?p=113


> > however, as with Generators, I think that we should endeavor to keep the
> > implementations close together by the most appropriate means.  I don't
> > want two versions of PHP syntax.
>
> I don't think whatever HHVM does without input from PHP community should
> be any argument for any change in PHP. If it is good for PHP, it can
> stand on its own merit, if it's not, then the fact that HHVM team did it
> for some internal reasons that we do not know can not be an argument.
>
> If we want a common PHP syntax that will be followed by different
> implementations, it's a great idea, but it can not start with "we
> already did it, so you have to do it too". I don't want many versions of
> PHP syntax either, but I don't think HHVM team should be the one
> deciding how the one version looks like. If they use syntax that is good
> (I think this specific one is not, but that's beside the point, as it is
> only my personal opinion) it can and should be argued on its own merits,
> not on the argument that it is in HHVM.
>
> I never stated, not intended to state, "we already did it, so you have to
do it too".  Please do not put words into my mouth.  I think it should be a
part of the conversation, not a dominant part, but a part.  Of course every
new feature should be argued on its own merits.  Please do not suggest that
I think otherwise.

--047d7b15aabdc6590304e14283c7--