Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:80834 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 5953 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2015 16:42:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 19 Jan 2015 16:42:47 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 80.177.120.119 marston-home.demon.co.uk Received: from [80.177.120.119] ([80.177.120.119:24674] helo=localhost.localdomain) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 1D/BB-64889-6043DB45 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 11:42:47 -0500 Message-ID: <1D.BB.64889.6043DB45@pb1.pair.com> To: internals@lists.php.net References: <0DD30A0D-E7CA-4150-83E0-8FD46635279C@ajf.me><8761c6280g.fsf@margaine.com><54B91D16.70901@gmail.com><78.22.47555.7C24AB45@pb1.pair.com><1421519637.40188.1.camel@proposaltech.com><54BABA93.9070809@gmail.com><49.CA.64889.A5EDCB45@pb1.pair.com><54BCE8F5.5080407@gmail.com><97.D7.64889.15C1DB45@pb1.pair.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 16:42:43 -0000 Lines: 7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 16.4.3528.331 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V16.4.3528.331 X-Posted-By: 80.177.120.119 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Remove PHP 4 Constructors From: TonyMarston@hotmail.com ("Tony Marston") "Andrey Andreev" wrote in message news:CAPhkiZz=gYDbHngV+gHhTgW415_KxoCU-31OiW=dxPkPg=tqHQ@mail.gmail.com... > >Hi, > >On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 5:01 PM, Tony Marston >wrote: >>>> But the only benefits with the removal of old features is a smaller >>>> code >>>> base for the core developers. The only "benefit" which is experienced >>>> in >>>> userland is that applications which have run for over a decade suddenly >>>> stop >>>> working. >>>> >>> >>> Ah, so you admit there may be benefits? Again, I do not say that those >>> benefits are definitely enough to justify the change in this case, but >>> they >>> are real, and I would like you to stop dismissing them. >> >> >> There is a big difference if a BC break which causes a minor benefit to >> the >> core developers also causes a major headache to the millions of >> developers >> who are the customers, the people who use the language to develop >> applications. The aim should be to eliminate customer grievances as much >> as >> possible and not to simply ignore them. >> > >You continue doing exactly what you were asked not to. If I wish to complain I don't need to ask your permission. I also have the right to respond to every post which argues against my opinion. >It's not just a "minor benefit to the core developers". It's an >extremely unpopular feature "Unpopular" means that people want to see it removed just because they don't like it. > that often leads to debugging nightmares even for users with enough > experience to take on senior development roles. Ignorance about how PHP works is no excuse. I believe that "RTFM" is the standard response in such situations. >PHP 4 style coding is just unknown to the majority of users today and But not for those users who started developing with PHP before version 5 became mainstream. Your attitude seems to be "Let's ignore those boring old farts who made the language what it is today and instead start pandering to a bunch of ignorant newbies". >most people assume that it is no longer supported Then most people assumed wrongly. Why should one section of the PHP community be made to suffer because of a wrong assumption made by another part of the community? >(or rather, that it >was never supported, because they don't even know it existed). Just because a bunch of newbies didn't realise that a feature existed is no reason to remove that feature. There are functions in the language that I don't use and have no desire to use, but do you see me advocating for their removal? >You're >obviously an exception to that, and you might argue that somebody's >lack of knowledge isn't an excuse to break all of your code, but >please stop arguing that a handful of core PHP developers decided to >drop a feature for their own benefit alone. That is simply not true. What benefit will there be to the PHP community outside of the core developers? Applications which don't use PHP 4 constructors will not notice a difference, but those which do will break. Where is the benefit in that? >Also, I haven't seen PHP4 style constructors used in years and you're >making it sound like every PHP application on the internet uses them - >very far from it. Just because you haven't seen any does not mean that they don't exist. It has already been pointed out that there are a large number of PEAR libraries which were written with PHP 4 constructors and have never been updated. >That being said, it is still a major BC issue and unfortunately we're >not going to have PHP 5.7 where it could've been deprecated, so I >guess being stuck with this feature (but deprecated) in PHP7 might be >the wiser choice. > >Cheers, >Andrey. -- Tony Marston