Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:84132
Return-Path: <marcio.web2@gmail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 86614 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2015 23:02:38 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 1 Mar 2015 23:02:38 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=marcio.web2@gmail.com; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=marcio.web2@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.42 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: marcio.web2@gmail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.215.42 mail-la0-f42.google.com  
Received: from [209.85.215.42] ([209.85.215.42:43877] helo=mail-la0-f42.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id 52/80-17251-D8A93F45 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Sun, 01 Mar 2015 18:02:37 -0500
Received: by labgf13 with SMTP id gf13so2361717lab.10
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Sun, 01 Mar 2015 15:02:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type;
        bh=ofxrRL1JViMWGF2IUtf77tSggVLSMZttVuqxCgQNwlc=;
        b=xYlDV2E9zaNzAiVH7msiCkyXIpe6gEMUV/azRHL9vSlOjHtX4lgQj+e1Fj8nZFwJHN
         2wyXP/tLMIyjcw6SVoBnSA1pos65ASk1AyAsC2NkW7E9SOuP5ZYbJr1TeSzPXB/rqZxz
         hiZ3PMciqlI1rB2t0yP7D1FAO34lv9SaNBiMLKjPJjvc7PDMjKRalyC+H+QWoxdd7Ouz
         9HPEvS9jojOiZjFyrou6h5b10rqRykmXSVrOAdEnklkwFSNwmNxGdlx0sCQMzyhM+yFN
         pydXJknHFnjWpBrtTAw64yFMTFF5R9BHMx+HQWj1FFc3AIKaIh5ixhcBNDKsqSZTTnW6
         mwVQ==
X-Received: by 10.112.181.41 with SMTP id dt9mr22332877lbc.56.1425250953250;
 Sun, 01 Mar 2015 15:02:33 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.152.118.193 with HTTP; Sun, 1 Mar 2015 15:02:13 -0800 (PST)
Reply-To: marcio3w@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2015 20:02:13 -0300
Message-ID: <CAOsHV+uApxF=pQngonMppam2AEnW0Sm1ESAaB9exLH0K0hMBWA@mail.gmail.com>
To: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c36986c8cdb40510421860
Subject: [PHP-DEV][RFC][DISCUSSION] Strict Argument Count
From: marcio.web2@gmail.com (Marcio Almada)

--001a11c36986c8cdb40510421860
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi, internals

I'm moving the "Strict Argument Count" RFC into discussion phase:

RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/strict_argcount
PR: https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/1108

Many different opinions were collected during research phase and the RFC
was updated with real BC break measurements and other important sections.
So, before discussing:

   - Even if you already read the RFC in the past, read it again now.
   - Don't claim **possible** massive BC breaks before read the
   measurements already done. No matter how seasoned you are with PHP, real
   numbers matter most than assumptions. Your measurements are welcome too.
   - Try the patch. Really.
   - Consider reading the use case present on this post: goo.gl/3ykdIy
   - Keep discussion on topic and remember we are all trying to improve PHP
   in some way :)

Thanks,
M=C3=A1rcio

--001a11c36986c8cdb40510421860--