Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:88547 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 87137 invoked from network); 29 Sep 2015 14:48:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 29 Sep 2015 14:48:53 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=pthreads@pthreads.org; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=pthreads@pthreads.org; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain pthreads.org from 209.85.160.174 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: pthreads@pthreads.org X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.160.174 mail-yk0-f174.google.com Received: from [209.85.160.174] ([209.85.160.174:36627] helo=mail-yk0-f174.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 77/50-20099-4D4AA065 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2015 10:48:52 -0400 Received: by ykdt18 with SMTP id t18so8956001ykd.3 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2015 07:48:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Tzi5HGNlv+sK+E3lAyN1fUMQd+ylw8KzbhQJRqW9d84=; b=DzhcF2kEJQtV5GjvvGpYpGr+cMTR6Xs8o2Ufcnk5N8KsZ+7MCg2eG9HclYuTeBPFqu dAYT5pJyw3p3Fn23iLk/ez4rF5CwKBiLT7Bs+2RbKd5VDMVMeSvOrtufnWaixBS+d071 K+fyjhvAtDDGn4rQdhF87VVof/P7CzfOKnY8VMeMYaq2HGKM0yP/PVHaKblFLBEmtMOW cuRZ4EcvgGH/r5jcswEAVcdNCIRZYUC3QiMkA4rh//3qATLmFj0P9TMAMefA/Ad46zk3 NhFVFp7/3agLsXYFtYdj5DQEo3m02OkKO4yfLHtdlXSBBG6kZvlcX4J0T8lcEUdTknD2 o/xA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQleYkGeiaMlHpIJsf3m7NMTt+O5c3oxwAd80pAdlTsa6dq5bDjDa2euTSSsKdBmDuiIgAhy MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.170.220.213 with SMTP id m204mr21926010ykf.113.1443538129243; Tue, 29 Sep 2015 07:48:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.129.111.197 with HTTP; Tue, 29 Sep 2015 07:48:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [165.120.223.197] In-Reply-To: References: <56095A0C.4070306@cubiclesoft.com> <1443529244.15520.67.camel@kuechenschabe> Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:48:49 +0100 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?Q?Johannes_Schl=C3=BCter?= Cc: Kalle Sommer Nielsen , Pierre Joye , Levi Morrison , PHP internals , Thomas Hruska , "S.A.N" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113a7d6c6a08d70520e3e976 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] async/await - is future reserved words in PHP 7.x? From: pthreads@pthreads.org (Joe Watkins) --001a113a7d6c6a08d70520e3e976 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sorry, that was all over the place ... was on way out the door ... What I should have said is that async/await don't directly solve problems, they are nice calling conventions for async APIs, but the APIs must exist before we talk about reserving or adding anything else. The real problem is that there is a lack of nice async API's, this problem can be solved independently of any syntax, and should be. Of course, there isn't much of a drive to create such API's internally ... they might never come ... thankfully projects like icicle, and others, have us pretty well covered. The fact is that there isn't much to gain by duplicating that functionality internally, it won't really go remarkably faster, and there would be far less people able to contribute to their development. That's better ... Cheers Joe On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Joe Watkins wrote: > We shouldn't reserve words on a whim ... > > async/await doesn't solve any problems for multithreaded programming, at > all ... it solves problems for asynchronous programming, a different > concept ... let's not confuse the two ... > > As mentioned you don't need any special syntax or reserved words for > asynchronous execution, these problems are not solved by adding two words > to the parser. The API's might not be very nice, and there aren't enough = of > them, but there is absolutely nothing stopping you writing asynchronous > code, and there wasn't in PHP4 either ... > > Cheers > Joe > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Johannes Schl=C3=BCter > wrote: > >> On Tue, 2015-09-29 at 08:49 +0200, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote: >> > Hi >> > >> > 2015-09-29 7:30 GMT+02:00 Pierre Joye : >> > > This model totally failed for us in the past. And given that these >> keywords >> > > will be used for anything related to async APIs, let reserve them an= d >> put >> > > our users on the safe side already. >> > >> > While I understand the concern, I don't think we should just go >> > reserve a bunch of keywords if there is no concrete plan an >> > implementation model, maybe an RFC is having more no votes than yes >> > votes etc, and we are stuck with 2 keywords that won't be used for >> > another few years at least >> >> I wouldn't block them in the parser. We however could list them in the >> naming guide http://php.net/manual/en/userlandnaming.php but for keeping >> this relevant we have to maintain that page :) >> >> Async/multi-threading functionality can also be built without keywords >> using a "future" or "promise" model like C++ or JavaScript. >> >> johannes >> > > --001a113a7d6c6a08d70520e3e976--