Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:85119
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.180 as permitted sender)
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <CAEZPtU6Jwrd_7p=vWj=SccydWKEjYg3drYRKtJ_qYpM958OrEg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABBJUpfiy1BpdyZ5MJmQb3vQz9U8TkSECHCRctupV+BUG1H=fw@mail.gmail.com> <CAEZPtU7qa9N+4HYdtjseN4K83e0Oy8rZDi8FbXfJ9Zp0ks6rRg@mail.gmail.com> <CABBJUpe_fUiwuJw5Q-u+ntVOyVU-xN+C2EFL79TmJJu7Gmh38w@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1503161113020.4205@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl> <CAGa2bXZm_ph9=TV_7oLB7NWSkX1iCpXqBiYVROQiKCFujrHJCQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABBJUpcvek+BEoHFPxrxqwLqAS3e6OLPdXbkKgNUoJqz9H7o1w@mail.gmail.com> <35.09.03331.B7BD6055@pb1.pair.com> <BC2A7F0C-5880-4F5C-80BF-D3539A40F9DD@gmail.com> <CAEZPtU6Jwrd_7p=vWj=SccydWKEjYg3drYRKtJ_qYpM958OrEg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 10:13:24 +0100
To: Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>
CC: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>,Pascal Chevrel <pascal.chevrel@free.fr>
Message-ID: <1D775226-AE34-4123-9BC4-3D9D8953F90C@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] About declare(strict_types = 1)
From: ppetermann80@gmail.com (Peter Petermann)



On March 16, 2015 11:10:41 PM GMT+01:00, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Mar 17, 2015 7:05 AM, "Peter Petermann" <ppetermann80@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On March 16, 2015 2:32:39 PM GMT+01:00, Pascal Chevrel <
>pascal.chevrel@free.fr> wrote:
>>
>> >It's too late, Bob's Basic STH missed the schedule for PHP 7, it was
>> >proposed way too late and the coercive STH RFC has just zero chance
>to
>> >pass, it's too much of a BC break for everybody. The dual mode STH
>is
>> >the only chance to have something for PHP 7 and remain competitive
>with
>> Rushing through with an controversial solution, because others didn't
>make a date seems like such a good plan.
>>
>> No one is dying if STH doesn't make it into 7.0.0.
>
>No one will die if php dies. Your point here is totally irrelevant.
PHP isn't dying without it. At least it hasn't in the last few years since it exists. 

>
>> >HHVM, Node.js… that we see people switch to. Baidu switched to HHVM,
>> >Wikipedia too, in my country big names switched from PHP to node.js
>and
>> >that was not just for performance reasons, it was also for the
>> >features.
>> hhvm offers an alternative php implementation that tries to be
>compatible,  hack(lang) is where you find the differences you are
>looking
>for.  That said, I don't see the sky falling if people who need a
>specific
>feature use another tool. The adoption rate of hack is tiny.
>>
>> As for nodejs, nodejs is a framework, not a language. Javascript does
>not
>offer type hints. And if you look at how to compete with nodejs, then
>what
>you should be looking at is what needs to be improved with php to allow
>frameworks like reactphp to work better. How to improve support for
>non-blocking io.
>>
>> And I dunno, but I don't think that "per file" settings make the
>callback-heavy code that's typical for non-blocking stuff better, in
>fact
>I'm convinced it will add an additional layer of headache.
>>
>> >Zeev himself admitted that we need something for PHP 7.
>> If it is THAT important for PHP 7 (and IMHO it's not) then maybe the
>timeline for PHP 7 needs to be reevaluated, to make sure all
>dependencies
>are the best option and not something rushed in because of
>::conflict::.
>
>I think you may talk to more developers. I have talked to many, at many
>confs and UGs (and way too many in the last few weeks, across the
>pacific),
>I can count users not looking for STH with one hand.
As I said, if you take it for THAT important, it should be in your own interest to get it right instead of rushing through a controversial compromise. 

Regards, 
PP.