Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:84601
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.44 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: stelian.mocanita@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <CA+9eiLsqjuabFqXu_YPb=1ebN-eeRxCpZXB8DOosq_OQi6N8cw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BLU436-SMTP234CAFED9639237DE430B18E2190@phx.gbl>
	<CAF+90c_VNK6AQe4RnBFGdOJKWLKvp+35dff+CMFKugkjBgN2GA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+9eiLsqjuabFqXu_YPb=1ebN-eeRxCpZXB8DOosq_OQi6N8cw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 00:18:14 +0100
Message-ID: <CAMc0WS5KL=DB9FOcVNVVM6pHFd+6dakfq50aeRFBOV8XbuXp+A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com>
Cc: Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>, Bob Weinand <bobwei9@hotmail.com>, 
	PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113478ec4c78d905110b7b92
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Basic Scalar Types
From: stelianm@php.net (Stelian Mocanita)

--001a113478ec4c78d905110b7b92
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Dmitry,

I tend to disagree with many people wanting this over nothing. It's a big
enough topic,
that raised waives in the community, to be treated properly and not just
throw it in before
feature freeze, so I agree with Nikita on this one.

My view on it is that if both RFC's fail, the feature should not be in 7.0
and have a proper
solution for 7.x, what ever that x might be, a solution that satisfies both
internals and userland.

On that topic, it's a shame that all this work and effort might be thrown
away and at the end of
the day we would be left with nothing.

Regards,
Stelian

On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 12:06 AM, Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:53 AM, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 10:28 PM, Bob Weinand <bobwei9@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > after all, some people are not happy with the current proposals about
> > > scalar types. So, they both still possibly may fail.
> > >
> > > Thus, I'd like to come up with a fallback proposal in case both
> proposals
> > > fail:
> > >
> > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/basic_scalar_types
> > >
> > > It shouldn't prevent any future improvements and still give use all the
> > > advantages of scalar types.
> > >
> >
> > Before I even start thinking about this, I'd like to have clarification
> as
> > to whether this RFC is still eligible for targeting the PHP 7.0 release.
> > The currently accepted interpretation is that all RFC votes must have
> > started by March 15th, which is irreconcilable with an RFC that was only
> > submitted today.
> >
> > Does this mean that we're delaying the PHP 7 schedule by two weeks?
> >
> > I feel like this topic is getting out of control. It's been discussed for
> > months, now we had one vote on Andrea's withdrawn proposal, then another
> > vote on Anthony's proposal, then another vote on the Zeev et al proposal
> -
> > and then we're going to have another one on Bob's proposal? With every
> vote
> > taking another couple of weeks. Hey, maybe I should also submit a STH
> > proposal that we can vote on after that?
> >
> > If both Anthony's and Zeev's proposal fail, I would recommend to just
> drop
> > this topic for 7.0 and discuss it again for PHP 7.1. The necessary
> > forward-compatibility changes to allow that are already proposed in
> another
> > RFC.
> >
>
> Bob proposes the base common part of both other RFCs.
> It actually had to be proposed in first place.
> I would prefer this instead of nothing. I think many people think the same.
>
> Thanks. Dmitry.
>
>
> >
> > Nikita
> >
>

--001a113478ec4c78d905110b7b92--