Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:85174
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 74.125.82.46 as permitted sender)
References: <CAAyV7nEtdFSdPMieK0EvdO+moCqDw7KH59=Lr3+pA10rn=isoQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <55079692.6050405@gmail.com> <5507E7DD.3010908@lsces.co.uk>
 <CAPwsocGBHjBtem0UM+-=d8bZ6s44+0f+ACLgKbcNpcuxKwVetw@mail.gmail.com>
 <E602B239-95F0-42CE-9978-B92C8F8F92EA@ez.no> <CAGa2bXbMhehAz+0ORLFk2F1hGJ0dOcN3HejYd1_DFVXJCvn+uQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEZPtU5TgZ8_phTYrvmBvHXbG=cCMgdvxni_oF9CogOhL2nXHw@mail.gmail.com> <CAGa2bXZA+JpO7meJ3P8muphZnSo35ovR0kyk-_PV5Y8zhJ16_g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGa2bXZA+JpO7meJ3P8muphZnSo35ovR0kyk-_PV5Y8zhJ16_g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Thread-Index: AQHl3ed/MjBYGVvxxPjHSp99rugVcQGA+GPHAmkBWZABti3NoQLPBtoCAvRkxBADSgq0YQEE3W/xnHlm+8A=
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 11:13:47 +0200
Message-ID: <96a270058f6dd544a8d5355254440d1a@mail.gmail.com>
To: Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Accepted] Scalar Type Declarations V0.5
From: zeev@zend.com (Zeev Suraski)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: yohgaki@gmail.com [mailto:yohgaki@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Yasuo
> Ohgaki
> Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 6:44 AM
> To: Pierre Joye
> Cc: PHP internals; Leigh; Andr=C3=A9 R=C3=B8mcke; Lester Caine
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Accepted] Scalar Type Declarations V0.5
>
> Hi Pierre,
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 18, 2015 11:26 AM, "Yasuo Ohgaki" <yohgaki@ohgaki.net> wrote:
> >
> > > I didn't have my time to spent for the patch. So I don't verify this
> > > by myself, but it seems common sense for this RFC.
> >
> > So you voted against it without knowing how it actually works or aims
> > to work? I suggest you to do it now then, before going further with
> > this discussion :)
> >
> I know we are better to play with patch before vote.
> I played with Zeev's patch and I was sure it's better ;)
>
> How many of voters spend enough time for both patches before vote?

Apparently very few.  In terms of people who actually reported their
findings or explicitly said they played with it here on internals, perhaps =
a
handful.

FWIW, as someone who did play with the patch (both patches, of course), I'm
not sure why people are claiming you don't understand the RFC.  Your
comments in the code are 100% accurate, which means you understood exactly
how it works.

Zeev