Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:88511
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.213.171 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56064FF6.9000600@gmail.com>
References: <BLU436-SMTP156E8D7D141A710541FCA0FE2450@phx.gbl>
	<CAB6YZuyWTRJ-E5dwR-UNsV-Ext8kZhdSGANH3m9UhfNMeA48yw@mail.gmail.com>
	<56064FF6.9000600@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:10:30 +0200
Message-ID: <CAB6YZuxX5Z+Znegq1_7+wU_f+w-0ng1OZ-3_ZQbkvWSRacgGTQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] Short Closures
From: pajousek@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Pavel_Kou=C5=99il?=)

On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com> w=
rote:
> Hi!
>
>> since the RFC doesn't look like it will pass, I have a question about
>> RFC process - will you be able to "fix" the RFC and submit it for vote
>> again with targeting PHP 7.1?
>
> Yes, but see:
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/voting#resurrecting_rejected_proposals
>
> So, to make another try, the RFC needs to be substantially amended or
> resubmitted in 6 months.
>
>> The biggest issues seem to be
>> - ~> operator instead of =3D=3D>
>> - missing type hints
>> - auto imports
>
> I would say changing these would be substantial. Just changing the
> operator - not sure, maybe if it is clear that with this change vote
> would pass (which currently isn't clear at all).
> --
> Stas Malyshev
> smalyshev@gmail.com

Seems you are right it's not clear after all; I skimmed through all
the e-mails in this thread and found only around 5 people stating that
the ~> operator was their reason to vote "no"; while I was writing the
previous e-mail, I really thought more people stated that here; on the
other hand, we don't know why the rest of those ~30 people voted no,
so it's really hard to say.

Anyways, thanks for sending the Ressurecting rejected proposals info. :)

Regards
Pavel Kou=C5=99il