Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:71088
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain tutteli.ch designates 80.74.154.78 as permitted sender)
To: "'Nikita Popov'" <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>
Cc: "'Kevin Ingwersen'" <ingwie2000@googlemail.com>,
	"'PHP internals'" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <581A185E-0F00-4B49-AA87-859D75E63BA2@googlemail.com>	<002501cf0fa4$20cbbcf0$626336d0$@tutteli.ch> <CAF+90c-qr-iAV9Hq5bMVrrO-RxsZQqN0+XasKwuBGBaUDLgj=w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAF+90c-qr-iAV9Hq5bMVrrO-RxsZQqN0+XasKwuBGBaUDLgj=w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2014 16:55:30 +0100
Message-ID: <002c01cf0fae$b8baa6c0$2a2ff440$@tutteli.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thread-Index: AQDovXkJWtzno98DSiv4K54/a4YWBAGmHY8wAWneVr+cNWGcgA==
Content-Language: de-ch
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Revisiting the "Named Arguments" RFC
From: php@tutteli.ch ("Robert Stoll")

Hey Nikita

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nikita Popov [mailto:nikita.ppv@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2014 4:49 PM
> To: Robert Stoll
> Cc: Kevin Ingwersen; PHP internals
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Revisiting the "Named Arguments" RFC
> 
> On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Robert Stoll <php@tutteli.ch> wrote:
> 
> > Since the RFC has not included my concerns so far I am going to bring them
> > up again. The included validation of
> > signatures is a huge BC break and thus a no-go for PHP 5.x IMO:
> >
> > http://markmail.org/message/blcph3p377x4ycmc#query:+page:1+mid:jtfa52bzgsua7yrt+state:results
> >
> > http://markmail.org/message/blcph3p377x4ycmc#query:+page:1+mid:u5y2pvzttbudkxqe+state:results
> 
> 
> Kindly reread the RFC and my last message in this thread. The RFC states
> the signature validation as an "open question" and my last mail states that
> it was decided not to include signature validation. So where did you get
> the idea of it being "included"?
> 
> Nikita

I did, unless it is not an error in my browser the section "open question" is empty.
I do not know which last email you mean but anyway the RFC (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/named_params) still states:
"If named parameters are introduced, signature validation should make sure that parameter names are not changed. Usually
signature mismatches between an interface and an implementing class throw a fatal error, but this is not possible in
this case due to the large BC break it would cause. Instead we could use some lower error type for this (warning /
notice / strict)."

Did you open another RFC?