Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:83449 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 28455 invoked from network); 21 Feb 2015 23:38:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 21 Feb 2015 23:38:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ircmaxell@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ircmaxell@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.217.169 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ircmaxell@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.217.169 mail-lb0-f169.google.com Received: from [209.85.217.169] ([209.85.217.169:33545] helo=mail-lb0-f169.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 70/BB-08895-20719E45 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2015 18:38:42 -0500 Received: by lbvp9 with SMTP id p9so12655127lbv.0 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2015 15:38:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=is7xEB/1gc70cSrYxyFTzlawsjari4zo88TS6eD6X0M=; b=L7TTN+prDEOta4FNGJUVgM9enHkzQ6NTASDHBDMJfhgwASfCa2l6yDruJgWYhCKqlN Zr0mTXcxJB4naDFCTZRLLF0c5FjJqWVf1R4FS5QzYDNQH4kMgl+mnk8BAAh8hh7Cz9ZD nR8fNr+pFRv6S6+myIGFClerq4AlBr0bSQmtu0vvu8BkoG+ZHUtqthP7IKm6rgasjwyC mpP3tFbA0wpoKval/0zJ548bGRolcn8VJBhEC59oWyejDe5srsV32WVZqNUXXo05ENmH Kjo2ljOrgxWAzEUHXTKMkkd1i82NIhu5Y6FqxaS0TghJfamxSRsowJJw3lB7NSjVQC5e 3W8g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.88.49 with SMTP id bd17mr2299232lab.43.1424561918857; Sat, 21 Feb 2015 15:38:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.25.43.9 with HTTP; Sat, 21 Feb 2015 15:38:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.25.43.9 with HTTP; Sat, 21 Feb 2015 15:38:38 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <7ef509ef10bb345c792f9d259c7a3fbb@mail.gmail.com> <8250289916f5128b5bc1a114428d374e@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2015 18:38:38 -0500 Message-ID: To: Zeev Suraski Cc: PHP internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c355da225689050fa1ab1d Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Coercive Scalar Type Hints RFC From: ircmaxell@gmail.com (Anthony Ferrara) --001a11c355da225689050fa1ab1d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Zeev, > > > Two more things regarding the competing RFC =E2=80=93 it=E2=80=99s st= ill alive, and > > > being promoted for PHP 7.0; And while it doesn=E2=80=99t create a hu= ge BC > > > break, it allows developers to selectively create localized BC breaks= , > > > on a per file basis. > > > > No, it does not. A BC break is something where existing code works, and > > you > > do nothing more than upgrade and have the new code not work anymore. > > > > With the other dual-mode RFC, if a user opts-in (enables strict mode), if > > code > > doesn't work that's not a BC break. That's a case of "you told us explicit > > you > > don't want this code to work if it's invalid, and guess what, it's > > invalid". > > That's splitting hairs IMHO. The bottom line is that many people will > undergo the same process Rasmus did as he experimented, flipping the switch > on because it's a best practice, and start having to fix their code to work. > But we can also agree on what we always agree here too :) Saying that turning on an optional and previously unavailable option inside code causing code breaks is any way a " BC" break is pure FUD. It is not BC by any definition that we have ever used on on this list, nor is it BC based on semver nor any other community accepted definition. Let's please avoid FUD and continue to discuss the proposals at hand... Anthony --001a11c355da225689050fa1ab1d--