Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:88040
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.178 as permitted sender)
To: Tom Worster <fsb@thefsb.org>, internals@lists.php.net
References: <D20DD596.65181%fsb@thefsb.org>
Message-ID: <55E8946D.80806@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 19:41:49 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <D20DD596.65181%fsb@thefsb.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Discussion] Short Closures
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins)

Tom Worster wrote on 03/09/2015 15:46:
> The unspoken rules of civility make some people suppress negative
> reactions to the proposal. In this case it was even implied, as you point
> out, that dissenting opinion is unwelcome. But I don't think such
> constraints are entirely fair so I gave my opinion.

A constructive criticism can still be a dissenting opinion, it just 
needs to be aimed at moving the conversation forward, not dismissing it 
out of hand.

If you want to say "I think this proposal is a bad idea because X, and 
none of the variations mentioned fix this fundamental problem in my 
opinion", that's a constructive point. Ideally, you might say "if 
somebody can come up with a way to Y, then I might be happier with the 
proposal", but if there's no such Y then fair enough.

To be fair, what you wrote was reasonably civil, and maybe I 
over-reacted. It just seemed a bit long on hyperbole and short on actual 
reasoning.

> As such, I'd be surprised if anyone
> would waste their time arguing with what I wrote and or risk their
> reputation by agreeing with me.

This seems to be rather a self-defeating stance: "I think this is a bad 
idea, everyone's going to ignore me, but I'll say it anyway". Why not 
instead try to say it in a way that would make people more likely to see 
it from your point of view? They might not come round to your point of 
view, but at least they'd have weighed your arguments.

Anyway, too much meta-discussion, let's get back to the discussion. I 
hope I didn't cause any offence by reacting in the way that I did. :)

Regards,
-- 
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]